in the article - I cut and paste
In support of its position, the government cites a 2012 Circuit Court decision, Kellmer v. Raines, which held that only FHFA was in a position to sue the former officers and directors of Fannie and Freddie for the breach of their duties to the corporation. That court insisted that, as a general proposition, its sole job was to “read the statute,” from which it concluded that “all rights, titles powers, and privileges” meant just that.
That is in support of the GOV's argument that shareholders can not have standing -- only the conservator ?
I really wish that NYT and Heritage Professor had explained better why this argument - which now is precedent law - will not hold here to preclude the hedge funds from suing?
Why this tine can share holders and not just the conservator sue?