@polk011.bsky.social
Agreed. they're been pointing to existing language in contracts for payment disputes as one of their excuses. Language *is* there but horribly disingenuous .
February 27, 2025 at 2:33 AM
Agreed. they're been pointing to existing language in contracts for payment disputes as one of their excuses. Language *is* there but horribly disingenuous .
I'll be curious if they make that argument. The payments in question are for work done prior to the TRO--some prior to the new administration --so they can't even pretend they no longer have to pay the 2 billion bc all contracts are suspended.
February 27, 2025 at 2:25 AM
I'll be curious if they make that argument. The payments in question are for work done prior to the TRO--some prior to the new administration --so they can't even pretend they no longer have to pay the 2 billion bc all contracts are suspended.
When would the ruling on the stay take place? Tomorrow? And I'm assuming judge Ali would issue the ruling
February 26, 2025 at 4:41 AM
When would the ruling on the stay take place? Tomorrow? And I'm assuming judge Ali would issue the ruling
What is the next step? Is the order to enforce the TRO still valid or has the administration filed a motion to stay? And any estimate on timeline for when this would go to the appeals court?
February 26, 2025 at 2:44 AM
What is the next step? Is the order to enforce the TRO still valid or has the administration filed a motion to stay? And any estimate on timeline for when this would go to the appeals court?
What is the next step? Is the order to enforce the TRO still valid or has the administration filed a motion to stay? And any estimate on timeline for when this would go to the appeals court?
February 26, 2025 at 2:43 AM
What is the next step? Is the order to enforce the TRO still valid or has the administration filed a motion to stay? And any estimate on timeline for when this would go to the appeals court?