An American in the Antique Store
Last week, Adrian Vermeule gave a lecture at a conference at Berlin’s Catholic Academy which brought together a diverse set of participants. Titled “Non Nova, Sed Nove: The Common Good in Constitutional Law”, the catholic convert gave a glimpse of his common good constitutionalism with a focus on the European tradition of civil law, developed by the Romans, preserved by the See of Rome and brought to fruition by legal scholars from Baldus to Jhering. His lecture, framed by comments from Corine Pelluchon and Joseph H.H. Weiler, wasn't really tying the threads closer. Vermeule reminds of an American tourist rummaging in the antique stores of Europe for things that will make an impression at home. Meanwhile, the locals are raising their eyebrows at his choices.
Continue reading >>
Disney v. DeSantis Creates Strange Bedfellows
On April 26, 2023, Disney escalated its public feud with Ron DeSantis, Florida’s current Governor and a 2024 presidential hopeful, by suing him in federal court. The complaint turns on a series of legislative actions DeSantis took in response to Disney's criticism of the so-called “Don’t Say Gay” bill he championed. The context in which the case has arisen allows the corporation to frame itself a brave defender of LGBTQAI+ rights. In reality though, Disney is no liberal darling and its constitutional complaint opens the door to buttress and expand a conservative reading of several constitutional provisions.
Continue reading >>
Florida and the New Assault on LGBT Rights
On May 17, Governor Ron DeSantis signed into law a raft of bills that will dramatically change the legal landscape for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people. While this marks the latest escalation of Florida's crusade against LGBT people, it is not an isolated case. As state legislative sessions across the United States draw to a close, the scope and severity of legislation regulating the lives of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people has been unprecedented. This post maps the scope and severity of the current anti-LGBT panic across the US, contextualizes its rise, and evaluates the potential for legal protection under the current state of the law.
Continue reading >>
Achmea Goes to Washington
Recently, a US District Court trashed a Dutch company's arbitral award against Spain. Why? Because investor-state arbitration within the EU violates European law. Yet, many tribunals keep issuing arbitral awards - especially under the infamous Energy Charta Treaty. Challenging those awards in domestic courts outside the EU, like here in Washington D.C., might work as corrective to the continuing illegal assumption of jurisdiction and blatant disregard for the EU Treaties by arbitral tribunals.
Continue reading >>
Attention Is All You Need
Das Verbot ChatGPTs durch die italienische Datenschutzbehörde bietet Gelegenheit einen Klassiker neu aufzulegen: Eine bahnbrechende, Technologie aus dem Silicon Valley zerschellt am harten Beton des Brüsseler Datenschutzregimes. Während einige technikkritische Stimmen laut applaudieren, prügeln andere auf das vermeintlich innovationsfeindliche Datenschutzrecht ein. Doch gibt ChatGPT tatsächlich Anlass für derart fundamentale datenschutzrechtliche Bedenken im Hinblick auf generative KIs?
Continue reading >>Squaring the Circle
The Italian Data Protection Authority banned ChatGPT for violating EU data protection law. As training and operating large language models like ChatGPT requires massive amounts of (personal) data, AI's future in Europe, to an extent, hinges upon the GDPR.
Continue reading >>A House in Disorder
In this post, I’ll explain what has been going on as the House of Representatives has cast an unprecedented number of ballots for Speaker of the House. There are quaint legal reasons why all of this is happening. But then I want to ponder what this says about the ability of the Republican Party to govern the United States because this early-days shutdown of the House follows a pattern in which, for nearly 40 years, the Republicans have wanted to both dominate the federal government and shut it down.
Continue reading >>E-Books for the Common Good
Das Internet Archive ist eine Institution. Bekanntestes Projekt dieser 1996 von Brewster Kahle gegründeten, aus den U.S.A. operierenden digitalen Bibliothek ist die Wayback Machine. Sie ermöglicht es Nutzer:innen, eine Zeitreise durch 771 Milliarden archivierte Webseiten zu unternehmen, von denen viele nicht mehr abrufbar sind. Daneben betreibt das Archive unter anderem eine Leihbibliothek für E-Books. Diese Open Library ist nun Gegenstand einer Klage von vier Verlagen, in der es um die urheberrechtswidrige Nutzung von 127 Titeln geht – und die den Zugang zu Millionen Titeln verschließen könnte.
Continue reading >>
Weder Festung Europa, noch Gefängnis Europa
Werden in der Europäischen Union bald nicht nur ausländische Direktinvestitionen in die EU (inbound), sondern auch Investitionen europäischer Unternehmen in Drittstaaten (outbound) einer hoheitlichen Investitionskontrolle unterzogen? Während die EU-Kommission erste Andeutungen hierzu macht, läuft in den USA die Diskussion bereits heiß – bis ins Weiße Haus.
Continue reading >>Petrified Constitutions
The crisis of US democracy is also a constitutional crisis. Many provisions of the most time-honoured of all constitutions now appear to be outdated and in urgent need of reform. However, no substantial reform of the US constitution is to be expected. The US constitution makes its change dependent on excessively high hurdles. The historical US model, which shaped constitutional development in Europe like no other, should be a warning to the European Union in particular. Dangers of petrification can also be clearly seen in the EU constitutional order.
Continue reading >>
The Penultimate Chapter in the Case of Julian Assange
After almost four years under unchanged detention conditions in the high-security prison Belmarsh, Julian Assange is facing yet another challenge. The upcoming decision of the High Court of England and Wales might ultimately determine whether Julian Assange can be extradited to the United States where he would face up to 175 years in prison if convicted on all 18 charges. If the High Court concludes that the first-instance proceedings should not be reopened, legal recourse in the United Kingdom would be exhausted. Many voices are therefore pinning their hopes on the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR).
Continue reading >>
Versteinerte Verfassungen
Die Krise der US-amerikanischen Demokratie ist auch eine Verfassungskrise. Viele Bestimmungen der altehrwürdigsten aller Verfassungen erscheinen heute im Verfassungsvergleich als überholt und dringend reformbedürftig. Eine substantielle Reform der US-Verfassung steht dennoch nicht zu erwarten. Denn die US-amerikanische Verfassung macht ihre Veränderung selbst von allzu hohen Hürden abhängig. Das historische US-amerikanische Vorbild, das die Verfassungsentwicklung in Europa wie kein anderes geprägt hat, sollte insbesondere der Europäischen Union eine Warnung sein. Gefahren einer Versteinerung lassen sich nämlich auch in der EU-Verfassungsordnung klar erkennen.
Continue reading >>
Das vorletzte Kapitel im Fall Assange
Nach bald vier Jahren unter unveränderten Haftbedingungen im Hochsicherheitsgefängnis Belmarsh sieht sich Julian Assange einer weiteren Herausforderung gegenüber. Mit der anstehenden Entscheidung des High Court of England and Wales wird von Seiten der britischen Justiz möglicherweise abschließend darüber entschieden, ob Julian Assange an die USA ausgeliefert werden kann. Viele Stimmen setzen daher ihre Hoffnungen in den Europäischen Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (EGMR).
Continue reading >>Why a United States Supreme Court Case About Pig Farming Matters So Much
The United States Supreme Court is currently considering a case that could have major implications for animal welfare, public health, the environment, and the balance between state and federal power. The case is called National Pork Producers Council v. Ross, and the Court heard oral arguments on October 11, 2022. The case concerns whether a state has the right to ban the sale of products made in ways that harm animals and public health.
Continue reading >>Rechtsfiguren als politische Waffen
Der US Supreme Court wird von vielen nicht mehr als ein (und sei es politisiertes) Gericht angesehen, sondern als ein durch und durch politischer Akteur, dessen Agenda darin besteht, das Programm der Republikanischen Partei auf gerichtlichem und das heißt: gegenmajoritärem Wege durchzusetzen. An dieser polarisierten Grundwahrnehmung dürfte sich auch in der am 3. Oktober eröffneten neuen Sitzungsperiode nichts ändern. Im Gegenteil. Es stehen erneut Entscheidungen von großer politischer Tragweite an. Unter anderem wird das Gericht in Moore v. Harper – „the most important case for American democracy in the almost two and a half centuries since America’s founding“ – über die Anerkennung der independent state legislature theory zu entscheiden haben.
Continue reading >>The Overreaching Court
In the United States, it does not appear to be the case that the apex judiciary faces truly significant attacks on its autonomy, whatever the expressed unhappiness of an increasing number of critics. At least some would argue that the problem is precisely the opposite, that the Supreme Court has a smug sense of its own autonomy and is willing to use it with reckless indifference to the consequences for the American polity overall.
Continue reading >>
Of Punks and Nerds
The 1970s and 80s brought about two new social archetypes – the punk and the nerd. While the anti-establishment punk wants to trash the (economic, political, social) system, wants to provoke and get attention for the sake of it, the nerd behaves rather inconspicuously but effectively. He might be socially awkward and overlooked at first, but skilled and smart as he is, he knows the rules of the game and the mechanisms to get ahead with his plans. When looking at different authoritarian leaders in the world today, these two archetypes come to mind. In this blogpost, I want to use these two archetype of authoritarian leaders to analyse their behaviour and sketch the contours of an analytical framework to compare and distinguish between them.
Continue reading >>Privacy in Peril
On Saturday, 25 June 2022, American women woke up to a different reality – one day earlier, in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, five justices on the US Supreme Court decided that the US Constitution does not protect a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy. This undoing of women’s autonomy comes in part from the Dobbs majority’s failure to recognize that the right to terminate a pregnancy derives from a right to privacy. Roe and Casey recognized that reproductive freedom implicates bodily integrity and physical privacy, along with a decisional privacy interest in the critical life choices surrounding reproduction and family planning. In the space of a single day, the Dobbs Court eviscerated the freedom and the privacy rights Americans have relied on since 1973. Moreover, in an era driven by an information economy and rapidly expanding surveillance technologies, the Dobbs Court’s eradication of the right to terminate a pregnancy also severely compromises informational privacy, which involves the right to shield information from disclosure.
Continue reading >>
Tesla und die Sicherheit autonomer Fahrzeuge
Im Juni 2022 hat die US-amerikanische National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) eine Untersuchung von Tesla angeordnet, die nicht weniger als 830.000 Fahrzeuge sämtlicher Produktlinien betrifft. Die Behörde ist das amerikanische Pendant zum Kraftfahrtbundesamt und unter anderem für die Sicherheit der zum Straßenverkehr zugelassenen Kraftfahrzeuge zuständig. Die Untersuchung von Tesla betrifft das von diesem Unternehmen eingesetzte Computerprogramm namens „Autopilot“.
Continue reading >>
Accessing Information about Abortion
The U.S. Supreme Court decision of 24 June 2022 overruled a half century of precedent supporting a constitutional right to abortion across the U.S. established in 1973 in Roe v. Wade. Essentially, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization left the decision on abortion to individual states. The ruling, although astonishing, was not necessarily a surprise, after its draft had leaked a few weeks earlier. But to the surprise of many, almost immediately, Facebook and Instagram started removing posts informing about access to abortion pills, the Associated Press and Vice first reported.
Continue reading >>
A Reckless Decision
On Thursday, 30 June 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its long-awaited ruling in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency on the final day of the Court’s term. In a 6-3 decision, the conservative-majority Court held that the EPA lacks authority to require power plants to achieve the “best system of emissions reduction,” thereby hampering the United States’ ability to tackle climate change—decades after the government first learned of the crisis.
Continue reading >>
Congress shall make no law
Am 30. Juni hat der U.S. Supreme Court mit 6-zu-3-Stimmen entschieden, dass die Bundes-Umweltschutzbehörde die Betreiber von Kohlekraftwerken auf der Grundlage des Clean Air Act auch künftig nicht dazu verpflichten darf, entweder die eigene Stromproduktion zu reduzieren, in die Produktion grünen Stroms zu investieren oder Emissionszertifikate im Rahmen eines Emissionshandelssystems zu erwerben. Die Entscheidung ist nicht nur wegen ihrer potentiell verheerenden Auswirkungen auf die Effektivität des US-Klimaschutzregimes von Interesse. An ihr lässt sich auch in exemplarischer Weise studieren, wie die gegenwärtige konservative Mehrheit des Supreme Court mit dem Problem der Versteinerung der amerikanischen Bundesgesetze umgeht.
Continue reading >>
Staatsgeheimnisse und effektiver Rechtsschutz nach 9/11
Staaten haben Geheimnisse, die sie nach ihren innerstaatlichen Rechtsvorschriften vor einer Veröffentlichung schützen. Besonders problematisch ist die Geheimhaltung, wenn sich das Verfahren um gravierende Menschenrechtsverletzungen dreht, die von staatlichen Stellen verübt worden sind. Hier kann die Geheimhaltung die justizielle Aufarbeitung staatlichen Unrechts beeinträchtigen oder gar ganz verhindern und den individuellen Anspruch auf effektiven Rechtsschutz leerlaufen lassen.
Continue reading >>
Dobbs kills Roe
Am Freitag, den 24. Juni 2022 hat der Supreme Court der USA das Recht auf Abtreibung, wie es durch die 50 Jahre lang bestehende Rechtsprechung aus Roe v. Wade und Planned Parenthood v. Casey festgelegt war, außer Kraft gesetzt. In der Entscheidung Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization hat der Supreme Court festgestellt, dass die Verfassung kein Recht auf Abtreibung enthalte.
Continue reading >>Tackling Discrimination in Targeted Advertising
On 21 June Meta and the US Department for Housing and Urban Development released a legal settlement that will restrict Meta’s ability to offer those clients some of its core ad-targeting products. It resolves (for now) a long-running case over discriminatory targeting of housing adverts. Meta is now prohibited from using certain targeting tools in this context, and has promised new tools to ensure more representative targeting. This US lawsuit should be a wake-up call for European regulators, reminding them that taking systemic discrimination seriously requires proactive regulatory reform and enforcement. The relevant provisions of the Digital Services Act (DSA) are largely symbolic.
Continue reading >>
What Culture Wars Hide
The American Conservative Political Action Coalition (CPAC) is meeting in Budapest on 19-20 May. The meeting signals that US conservatives have chosen Hungary as proof of concept for the politics they want. Prime Minister Viktor Orbán is proudly illiberal and proudly politically incorrect. Having won his fourth consecutive election in April with his largest parliamentary majority yet, Orbán demonstrates to American conservatives that his brand of politics can triumph.
Continue reading >>Law’s Fate under the US “War on Terror”
More than 20 years after the US declared “war on terror” we must assess the damage it inflicted on the core values embodied in the rule of law and the success of efforts to defend them. The fate of the rule of law — whose raison d’être is to restrain the state from abusing its power — itself depends on politics. Party control of the executive and legislature (which in turn shapes the appointment of judges) was the single most powerful determinant of responses to the numerous abuses under all four administrations since 9/11.
Continue reading >>
Frauen ohne Privatsphäre
Das Recht auf einen Schwangerschaftsabbruch grundrechtlich zu verankern ist eine der größten Errungenschaften US-amerikanischer Verfassungsrechtsprechung. Bereits 1973 stellte der Supreme Court fest, dass das Recht auf Privatsphäre das Recht einer Frau umfasst, frei zu entscheiden, ob sie ein Kind bekommen will oder nicht. Damit erkannte das Gericht die fundamentale Verknüpfung zwischen der Identität als Frau und der Entscheidung über Reproduktion als höchstpersönliche und grundrechtsrelevante Entscheidung an. Diese Verknüpfung schickt sich der Supreme Court jetzt an zu kappen.
Continue reading >>Das Ende von Roe v. Wade
Das Magazin Politico hat einen geleakten Entscheidungsentwurf des Supreme Courts veröffentlicht, der die Abkehr vom geltenden Recht auf Abtreibungen in den USA bedeuten würde. Der mit einer konservativen Mehrheit besetzte Supreme Court würde damit die Wahlversprechen Donald Trumps und die Hoffnungen einer großen Anzahl an Republikaner*innen umsetzen und Bundesstaaten die Möglichkeit geben, Abtreibungen komplett zu verbieten.
Continue reading >>Elon Musk Wants to Buy Twitter to Create a Free Speech Utopia: Now What?
The enigmatic Tesla founder Elon Musk has made a public offer to buy 100% of Twitter’s shares at approximately 138% of each share’s value. In his letter of intention submitted to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Musk describes that free speech is necessary in a democratic society, and he wishes to unlock its full potential by bringing Twitter under (his) private ownership. Constitutionally this raises an interesting point: if indeed a billionaire wants to change the rules of speech on the ‘new public squares’ by acquiring a social media platform, can he – and should he be able to?
Continue reading >>Justice Thomas Will Not Recuse. But Should He?
There is a growing elite and scholarly consensus (at least on the American left) that Justice Clarence Thomas “must immediately recuse himself from any cases relating to the 2020 election and its aftermath.” The demand is extraordinary, and as such, it has captured global attention. The dispute highlights some notable things about the Court, but it is the scandal that really captures attention. So far, calls for recusal have come almost exclusively from the left. Conservatives have dismissed the idea. What to make of it all?
Continue reading >>
On the Internet, No One Knows You’re a Cop
As long as police can continue to exploit the legal fiction of user “consent” to access our private communications, our privacy rights will remain just as fictional. While we’re hopeful that the courts will one-day strike this practice down as violating the Fourth Amendment, more urgent statutory protections are needed. The legislation needn’t be lengthy or complex, it’s not a nuanced question. To the contrary, what we need is a complete and categorical ban on the use of fake accounts by police, letting those who’ve been surveilled sue, and suppressing the evidence that’s obtained at trial.
Continue reading >>
Rechtfertigt die Bedrohung durch den Terrorismus Migrationsbeschränkungen?
Migranten auszusperren, um das ohnehin schon sehr niedrige Terrorismusrisiko geringfügig zu senken, könnte gerechtfertigt sein, wenn die Beschränkungen nur wenige oder gar keine moralisch bedeutsamen Kosten verursachen würden. Tatsächlich aber ist es ein großes Unrecht, Migranten, die vor Unterdrückung und Krieg fliehen, auszusperren. Die Ausgrenzung fügt enormen Schaden zu, verletzt die Menschenrechte gegen ungerechte Diskriminierung und steht auch im Widerspruch zu den Konzepten der Würde, die in der modernen europäischen und internationalen Rechtsprechung eine wichtige Rolle spielen.
Continue reading >>
Unmatched Levels of Sanctions Coordination
In early 2022, the European Union (EU) was quick and decisive in imposing an unprecedented set of measures against Russia. Among other things, the EU targeted the Russian Central Bank, which is an extraordinary move, given that central banks are rarely on sanctions lists. Reconciling the interests of 27 Member States is an art itself, especially in a highly sensitive policy area which continues to be dominated by individual Member State interests. Overall, the swiftness of EU measures went beyond most of our expectations.
Continue reading >>
Trump’s Straussian Shyster
Emails now available to US House of Representatives’ investigators suggest that John C. Eastman, the Trump lawyer behind the failed attempt to overturn the presidential election results, knew that his activities violated the US Electoral Count Act. Eastman’s activities shed light on ideological traits of Trumpism that have received little attention from legal scholars. He and other hardcore Trump disciples have relied on a highly selective interpretation of the ideas of Leo Strauss (1899-1973), the German Jewish refugee political thinker, to justify Trump’s authoritarian proclivities. Their ideological brew continues to threaten constitutional government in the United States.
Continue reading >>
Donald Trump’s Post-9/11 Presidency and the Legacy of Carl Schmitt
Shortly before Trump’s inauguration in 2016, I suggested that the president-elect might prove to be a chief executive in the mode of Carl Schmitt. Trump, though, represented something different. If the early Bush years were characterized by legal interpretations that pushed the edges of executive and sovereign power, Trump’s vision of the presidency was that of a man who had no interest in legal interpretation whatsoever. As he later said of the portion of the Constitution that spells out the details of presidential power, “I have an Article II, which allows me to do whatever I want.”
Continue reading >>
Terror, emergencies, drastic conditions and democratic constitutionalism
Constitutions establish governmental powers, but they do not in themselves confer legitimacy, let alone constitute the body politic that alone can grant legitimacy. Liberal democratic constitutions institute respect for individuals in different ways, but some lines are firmly and almost universally drawn. Torture and mutilation, however, are almost universally condemned in properly liberal societies. But when government, betraying its own duly constituted role as agent of society, turns to torture as a tool to inquire into, protect against and punish even the severest threats to itself and to individual persons, it runs up against an absolute limit of morality, decency, respect for the human person, and undermines itself.
Continue reading >>
Die Auswirkungen von 9/11 auf die Meinungsfreiheit in den Vereinigten Staaten
In den Vereinigten Staaten waren die tatsächlichen Auswirkungen des 11. Septembers und des anschließenden "Kriegs gegen den Terror" auf die Informations- und Pressefreiheit komplex und in vielerlei Hinsicht weitaus geringer als erwartet. Tatsächlich sind die Rechte auf freie Meinungsäußerung gegenüber der Regierung in den Vereinigten Staaten nach wie vor weitgehend gewahrt; die wirklichen Konflikte und Fragen betreffen heute die Rolle privater Internetunternehmen, insbesondere der sozialen Medien, bei der Einschränkung der freien Meinungsäußerung.
Continue reading >>
The Impact of 9/11 on Freedom of Expression in the United States
In the United States the actual impact of 9/11 and the subsequent “War on Terror” on speech and press freedoms has been complex, and in many ways much less than expected. In fact, free speech rights vis-à-vis the government remain largely robust in the United States; the real conflicts and issues today concern the role of private Internet companies, notably social media, in restricting free speech.
Continue reading >>
The Death of Law and Equity
On the same day, the U.S. Supreme Court issued decisions governing requests for emergency stays of two rules protecting Americans from COVID 19. Both rules relied on very similar statutory language, which clearly authorized protection from threats to health. Both of them presented strikingly bad cases for emergency stays. Yet, the Court granted an emergency stay in one of these cases and denied it in the other. These decisions suggest that the Court applies judicial discretion unguided by law or traditional equitable considerations governing treatment of politically controversial regulatory cases.
Continue reading >>The Iron Cage of Veneration
From my perspective, the most fundamental question that Arato and Sajó are asking is precisely how committed lawyers and constitutionalists should be to particular political systems that do not, at least on the surface, offer any grounds for optimism that the next election will “vote the rascals out of office” and enable forward movement to achieving the grand aspirations of a liberal constitutional order. Paradoxically or not, one might have more hope about Hungary, Poland, Chile, Brazil, or other countries unafflicted by “veneration” of a constitutional system that, left unreformed, serves as an iron cage, a “clear and present danger” to the actual achievement of liberal constitutional aspirations.
Continue reading >>
Ein hohles Versprechen
In der Zeit nach dem 11. September haben wir erlebt, dass es den Gerichten nicht gelungen ist, das Wachstum des Überwachungsstaates einzudämmen, was neue Missbräuche indirekt fördert und billigt. Diese Ausweitung des Überwachungsstaates rückt zunehmend in den Mittelpunkt des politischen Diskurses in den USA. Wir sehen neue lokale Gesetze, die einige der missbräuchlichsten Technologien verbieten und die zivile Kontrolle wieder stärken.
Continue reading >>
A Hollow Promise
Throughout the post-9/11 period, we’ve seen the courts fail to check the growth of the surveillance state, inviting and sanctioning new abuses. But we do see reason for hope. The expansion of the surveillance state is increasingly taking center stage in American political discourse. While it’s unclear if America’s political, legal, and constitutional systems will ever fully recover from the post-9/11 moment, it is clear that only mass political movement will be able to edge back us from the precipice of authoritarianism and reassert constitutional checks and the rule of law.
Continue reading >>
Biden’s Vaccine-or-Test Mandate in Legal Limbo
COVID-19 vaccine, a medical marvel of the first order, has in due course become the subject first of political and then legal controversy. Several states and businesses brought suit against the Biden administration’s mandate that large employers require vaccinations or weekly testing, and a federal appeals court has issued a stay blocking the mandate. As if the stakes in this litigation weren’t high enough, the case could turn into a showdown not only over vaccination, but over the power of regulatory agencies in the United States more generally.
Continue reading >>
Has the U.S. Supreme Court Effectively Overruled Roe v. Wade?
Late in the evening of September 1 the U.S. Supreme Court issued an order that many critics have described as effectively overruling Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision holding that the U.S. Constitution protected a woman’s right to choose to have an abortion. That description, though technically inaccurate, does capture something important about the Court’s order: It made abortions unavailable as a practical matter for many women in Texas who would have had access to abortion services had the Court issued a different order.
Continue reading >>