Sure, but dealing with contractor claims on an individual basis, most likely through the Court of Federal Claims, was what the government said needed to happen in the court filings here.
2025-03-08 08:53:09
Don't think people should be getting excited about a procedural ruling from the SCOTUS. Assuming the case gets back on an appeal of the preliminary injunction (which is referenced in the SCOTUS order), then we would see how Barrett and others rule on the merits. We just know how four of them would rule right now. OTOH, the government now says they are exercising cancellation provisions in the contracts, which would probably make the whole case moot.
The commenter archive features may be temporarily disabled at times.
Sure, but dealing with contractor claims on an individual basis, most likely through the Court of Federal Claims, was what the government said needed to happen in the court filings here.
Don't think people should be getting excited about a procedural ruling from the SCOTUS. Assuming the case gets back on an appeal of the preliminary injunction (which is referenced in the SCOTUS order), then we would see how Barrett and others rule on the merits. We just know how four of them would rule right now. OTOH, the government now says they are exercising cancellation provisions in the contracts, which would probably make the whole case moot.