Reply to And now the Kennedy Center

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "And now the Kennedy Center "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Is there a way to shift the legal liability to the contractors?  If a contractor agrees to demolish the KC without proper legislative approval, could they be open to lawsuits?  If every contractor understood that they'd be opening themselves up to massive liability, the White House might be stymied for a while.[/quote]

Good call.  Or at least make some noise in the press about plans to do that ASAP because we know Donnie loves a wrecking ball.[/quote]

This. Contractors need to know ASAP that they will be in the crosshairs. [/quote]

This may be the most effective route.  I wish we could threaten them with jail time but I'd take massive liability.  Make it absolute poison to go along.[/quote]

Research derivative sovereign immunity.[/quote]
Does derivative sovereign immunity actually shield the contractor if the direction from the government violates Federal law?  To quote from a legal site:  "Yearsley immunity emanates from Yearsley v. W.A. Ross Const. Co., an 80-year-old Supreme Court decision, which established that a contractor is immune when (i) it performed acts pursuant to a valid authorization of Congress and (ii) the contractor did not exceed the scope of that authority."[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics