The procedural posture of the case is going to result in a Preliminary Injunction, which can then be appealed, before any payments go out that the Government Objects To.
This is incredibly helpful, and thank you for filling in a niche of explaining the nuance the media always misses on such legal issues. I hope you continue to do so. It reminds me of something the late Roger Ailes once said about the press during his political consulting days, long before he helped create and direct Fox News. The media, he said, is about getting its headline and using as explicit language as possible, whether someone is wrong or right. "If you add nuance, it confuses the press."
Ship, as you may know, I am a lawyer who writes about fake news and legal issues. Your breakdowns of these issues are helpful even to lawyers like me. I avoided writing about this case because your articles are so thorough and comprehensive. Brilliant work, as usual.
Very helpful explanation of the mechanics of the court system and the reality behind the rulings. From the brief stories I read it sounds like the 4 justices that ruled against were ready to jump to the end of the game re jurisdiction. Is that right?
Thank you for your explanation. The law is an unwieldy beast for us laymen and I don’t understand the legalese. To my past self: stop making lawyer jokes, those people have big brains 🧠
Thanks for explaining the nuances the Courts, The President and the contractors face. Good to know we won’t be hearing this ad infinitum with contracts cancelled.
This is incredibly helpful, and thank you for filling in a niche of explaining the nuance the media always misses on such legal issues. I hope you continue to do so. It reminds me of something the late Roger Ailes once said about the press during his political consulting days, long before he helped create and direct Fox News. The media, he said, is about getting its headline and using as explicit language as possible, whether someone is wrong or right. "If you add nuance, it confuses the press."
Ship, as you may know, I am a lawyer who writes about fake news and legal issues. Your breakdowns of these issues are helpful even to lawyers like me. I avoided writing about this case because your articles are so thorough and comprehensive. Brilliant work, as usual.
You just made me feel less dumb and in the weeds and I thank you for it.
Ship, I hate paying attorneys but my subscription to your Substack is worth every penny. 😁
I'll have to read this again after more coffee, but thanks for the explanation. No way the media can deal with these complexities.
Way over my head but thank you as always!
Very helpful explanation of the mechanics of the court system and the reality behind the rulings. From the brief stories I read it sounds like the 4 justices that ruled against were ready to jump to the end of the game re jurisdiction. Is that right?
Thank you for your explanation. The law is an unwieldy beast for us laymen and I don’t understand the legalese. To my past self: stop making lawyer jokes, those people have big brains 🧠
I have read from others that the Federal Claims Court is the proper venue for the plaintiffs together paid. Is there any rationale for that view?
Once again this is very helpful , and thank you.
Thanks for explaining the nuances the Courts, The President and the contractors face. Good to know we won’t be hearing this ad infinitum with contracts cancelled.