{"id":138,"date":"2026-06-04T13:12:42","date_gmt":"2026-06-04T13:12:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=138"},"modified":"2026-06-04T13:12:42","modified_gmt":"2026-06-04T13:12:42","slug":"opinions-expected","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=138","title":{"rendered":"Opinions expected"},"content":{"rendered":"

It\u2019s a Thursday in June, and seasoned Supreme Court watchers likely know what that means: We\u2019re expecting opinions this morning. Our opinion day live blog begins at 9:30 a.m. EDT.<\/p>

Read more Announcement of opinions for Thursday, June 4<\/a><\/p>

At the Court<\/h2>

After the possible announcement of opinions this morning, the justices will meet in a private conference to discuss cases and vote on petitions for review. Orders from that conference are expected on Monday at 9:30 a.m. EDT.<\/p><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

Morning Reads<\/h2>

House Republicans advance constitutional amendment to prevent US Supreme Court expansion<\/h3>

Nate Raymond, Reuters<\/svg><\/span><\/p>

On Wednesday, a Republican-led House panel “advanced a proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would permanently limit the number of justices on the U.S. Supreme Court to nine, citing the potential for Democrats to someday ‘pack the court’ if they regain control of Congress,” according to Reuters. “The U.S. House Judiciary Committee voted 15-8 along party lines to move forward the proposed constitutional amendment despite long odds that it would ever be finalized.\u201d To pass, the amendment would need the support of two-thirds of the House and Senate, “and 38 states would then need to vote to ratify it.”<\/p><\/div><\/div>

Trump Begins Rebuilding His Tariff Wall, Citing Forced Labor<\/h3>

Alicia Diaz and Jennifer A Dlouhy, Bloomberg<\/svg><\/span><\/p>

Late on Tuesday, the Trump administration made its \u201cbiggest move\u201d yet toward rebuilding the system of tariffs that was \u201cstruck down by the Supreme Court\u201d earlier this year, according to Bloomberg. \u201cFollowing an investigation into how trade partners handle goods allegedly produced by forced labor, a 10% tariff rate would apply to imports from Canada, Mexico, the European Union, Taiwan and the UK, among other places,\u201d the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative announced. \u201cProducts from other major economies, including China, India, Japan, South Korea, Brazil and Switzerland, would be subject to a 12.5% levy.\u201d Bloomberg noted that the \u201crecommended duties are a result of probes launched under a separate legal authority known as Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974.\u201d<\/p><\/div><\/div>

Trump Administration Fights Court Order to Refund Some Tariffs<\/h3>

Tony Romm and Ana Swanson, The New York Times<\/svg><\/span><\/p>

In an emergency appeal filed late Tuesday night, the Trump administration asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to block an order from the Court of International Trade that would require U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Rodney S. Scott to offer testimony on the tariff refund process next week, according to The New York Times. Also on Tuesday, the administration filed \u201ca separate notice that it intended to challenge\u201d the trade court\u2019s \u201corder that requires the government to refund the full $166 billion collected from illegal tariffs.\u201d The government has said it will not automatically process refund requests from \u201cbusinesses whose tariff bills were already paid and finalized\u201d when the Supreme Court issued its ruling and will, instead, wait on those importers to file their own lawsuits seeking the refunds.<\/p><\/div><\/div>

Attitudes toward same-sex marriage and transgender issues are shifting, Gallup poll shows<\/h3>

Geoff Mulvihill and Amelia Thomson-DeVeaux, Associated Press<\/p>

A new Gallup poll shows that \u201c[a]cceptance of same-sex marriage and relationships in the U.S. has flattened after more than two decades of steadily increasing support, with an ongoing decline among Republicans,\u201d according to the Associated Press. The survey, fielded in May, found that around \u201c65% of U.S. adults believe same-sex marriage should be legal, down slightly from 71% in 2022 and 2023.\u201d The AP noted that \u201c[l]awmakers in at least 11 states introduced legislation for their current or most recent sessions calling on a ban on same-sex marriage. … Most didn\u2019t pick up momentum. But the Tennessee House passed a measure to allow private citizens and organizations not to recognize the unions; Idaho\u2019s House passed a resolution calling on the Supreme Court to undo\u201d its 2015 decision legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide.<\/p><\/div><\/div>

This \u2018necessary and proper\u2019 ban could almost drive someone to drink<\/h3>

Jarrett Dieterle, The Washington Post<\/p>

For The Washington Post\u2019s Red Tape newsletter, Jarrett Dieterle explored two recent federal circuit court decisions on the ban on \u201cmaking moonshine, applejack and other spirits\u201d at home, which \u201cteed up a likely Supreme Court fight over the ban that could shape the boundaries of government power.\u201d The ban in question \u201cstems from a 19th-century push to tax alcohol and tobacco\u201d and prohibits \u201cthe distillation of consumable spirits from \u2018any still, boiler, or other vessel … in any dwelling house.\u2019\u201d In the two ongoing federal lawsuits over the 1868 law, the government \u201cclaims that the ban is justified as a \u2018necessary and proper\u2019 exercise of the government\u2019s taxing power\u201d and also \u201casserts that the ban is permissible under the Constitution\u2019s commerce clause, which empowers Congress to regulate economic activity \u2018among the several states.\u2019\u201d Dieterle contends that these arguments show the government is \u201cdrunk on power.\u201d<\/p><\/div><\/div>

The Proposed Trump NDA Is Following John Roberts\u2019s Bad Example<\/h3>

Madiba K. Dennie, Talking Points Memo<\/p>

In a column for Talking Points Memo, Madiba K. Dennie highlighted the Office of Personnel Management\u2019s \u201cdraft of a sweeping nondisclosure agreement that the administration hopes to impose on millions of federal workers.\u201d Specifically, Dennie pointed out one of the Trump administration\u2019s justifications for the potential NDA \u2013 that the \u201cSupreme Court has a gag rule, too.\u201d Chief Justice John Roberts\u2019 use of NDAs with court employees came to light in a February story from The New York Times. Dennie contended that confidentiality agreements are \u201cinherently in tension with democracy\u2019s demand for transparency.\u201d<\/p><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

On Site<\/h2>
Relist Watch<\/span>

A random assortment of relists: prolonged detention, confessions of error, small juries, and new rules on habeas<\/h3>

By John Elwood<\/p>

In his Relist Watch column, John Elwood offered an overview of four newly relisted petitions, which cover such topics as the government\u2019s authority to detain certain noncitizens without bond hearings as they await removal proceedings and whether a jury of six satisfies the Sixth Amendment\u2019s guarantee of a jury trial.<\/p><\/div>

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Contributor Corner<\/span>

The two Roberts courts<\/h3>

By Adam Feldman<\/p>

In his Empirical SCOTUS column, Adam Feldman examined the current makeup of the court and how discussions pitting the six Republican-appointed justices against the three Democratic-appointed ones can distract from \u201cserious disagreement inside the conservative majority.\u201d According to Feldman\u2019s analysis, there are \u201crecurring internal divisions among the court\u2019s conservatives over how far to move, how broadly to write, and how much authority courts should exercise in technically complex disputes.\u201d<\/p><\/div>

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
SCOTUS Outside Opinions<\/span>

When and why did complying with the Voting Rights Act become unconstitutional?<\/h3>

By Issa Kohler-Hausmann & Kevin Z. Yang<\/p>

In Louisiana v. Callais, the Supreme Court made it more difficult for plaintiffs to prevail on a claim that a map violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits racial discrimination in voting. But did it also adopt a new rule for when an electoral map violates the 14th Amendment as a racial gerrymander? Issa Kohler-Hausmann and Kevin Z. Yang wrestled with that question.<\/p><\/div>

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

Podcasts<\/h2>
Amarica\u2019s Constitution<\/span>

Rosen on Liberty; Gorsuch on Gorsuch – with Jeffrey Rosen and Justice Neil Gorsuch<\/h3>

Akhil Amar and Andy Lipka interview Jeffrey Rosen, president emeritus of the National Constitution Center and GW law professor, about the mission of his new podcast and his special passion for history, the Constitution, and the American idea. They then introduce the first episode of that podcast, The Blessings of Liberty, featuring a conversation between Rosen and Justice Neil Gorsuch.<\/p><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

A Closer Look<\/div>

C.S. v. McCrumb<\/h3><\/div>

In February 2022, Robert Kerr Elementary School in Durand, Michigan, took part in the \u201cGreat Kindness Challenge,\u201d which it marked with kindness-themed activities and dress-up days, including \u201cHat Day,\u201d on which students could wear a hat of their choosing throughout the school day. C.S., who was then in third grade at Kerr, chose to wear \u201ca black baseball cap featuring a white star, a white image of an AR-style rifle, and the phrase \u2018come and take it,\u2019\u201d according to her , which invites the Supreme Court to revisit under what circumstances public school officials can limit students\u2019 First Amendment rights.<\/p>

Read more A random assortment of relists: prolonged detention, confessions of error, small juries, and new rules on habeas<\/a><\/p>

After noticing the gun on C.S.\u2019s hat, the school\u2019s behavioral specialist notified the principal, who determined that the hat violated Kerr\u2019s dress code. School officials contacted C.S.\u2019s parents to ask if they would drop off a different hat. When her parents declined, officials asked C.S. to remove the hat and put it in her locker.<\/p>

Approximately three months later, C.S.\u2019s family brought a Section 1983 claim against school officials, contending, among other things, that their Hat Day decision violated the First Amendment. Before a federal district court, the officials defended their choice by emphasizing not just the school\u2019s dress code, which prohibits wearing \u201coffensive\u201d clothing, including clothes with violent themes, but also their desire to avoid disruption, particularly among students who had transferred to Kerr after a November 2021 school shooting in a nearby town.<\/p>

In March 2024, the district court granted school officials\u2019 motion for summary judgment, holding that school administrators did not violate C.S.\u2019s free speech rights by having her remove the hat because removal was \u201creasonably necessary to avoid disruptions of the teaching and learning process in light of the age of the students and the context of recent experiences.\u201d<\/p>

Last year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit that decision, emphasizing the limits on student speech articulated by the Supreme Court in 1969\u2019s Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District<\/em>, which centered on middle and high school students who wore black armbands to school to protest the Vietnam War. Tinker<\/em>, according to the 6th Circuit, \u201cprotects the First Amendment rights of teachers and students in public school as long as their speech does not threaten to substantially disrupt or interfere with school activities.\u201d When confronted with C.S.\u2019s hat, the court concluded, \u201cschool officials made a reasonable forecast of substantial disruption to the school\u2019s educational environment.\u201d<\/p>

In her at the Supreme Court, C.S. contends that the 6th Circuit\u2019s decision \u201cexposes large and growing cracks in Tinker<\/em>.\u201d In that 1969 case, C.S. continues, the Supreme Court held \u201cthat avoiding \u2018discomfort and unpleasantness\u2019 are insufficient grounds for restricting\u201d student speech, and yet \u201cthe Sixth Circuit now has recognized such an exception, covering speech that school officials speculate could cause hurt feelings or emotional harm.\u201d<\/p>

The appellate court\u2019s emphasis on how C.S.\u2019s hat might make her classmates feel is especially problematic, according to C.S., given that school officials did not offer the November 2021 school shooting as an explanation of their decision until after the lawsuit was filed. \u201cThe Sixth Circuit has approved the squelching of First Amendment protected rights based on nothing but sheer speculation about the effect C.S.\u2019s hat conceivably could have on other students\u2014assumptions school officials did not voice until months later, and which conveniently dovetail with their personal dislike of guns.\u201d<\/p>

Initially, school officials waived their right to respond to the petition, but the court requested a response in early March. In that , filed last month, the officials counter that C.S. is not asking the court to clarify its holding in Tinker<\/em>, but instead to \u201crewrite\u201d it by \u201crequir[ing] school officials to disclose all justifications for restricting student speech at some unknown point pre-lawsuit.\u201d They further argue that the case is an \u201cexceptionally poor vehicle\u201d for addressing students\u2019 free speech rights, in part because of the \u201cunusual\u201d circumstances, which include the nearby school shooting just months before Hat Day.<\/p>

C.S. v. McCrumb<\/em> is scheduled to be considered by the justices for the first time at their conference on Thursday.<\/p><\/div><\/div>

SCOTUS Quote<\/h2>

MR. CLEMENT: \u201cWell, a couple of things, Justice Sotomayor. I went back to the Tropiano<\/em> case because it is sort of the progenitor of this whole line of Second Circuit cases, and I noticed two things. One, I noticed it was written by a district court sitting by designation. So I mean, I \u2013 I don’t mean anything by that other than this is not Marbury<\/em>. Second, I would say that the second thing I noticed is that the debt \u2013\u201d<\/p>

JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: \u201cOh, I think when I sat as a district court judge, I would have been insulted by that.\u201d<\/p>

(Laughter.)<\/p>

MR. CLEMENT: \u201cWell, it’s not \u2013 it’s a good thing you’re no longer sitting in that capacity, Your Honor.\u201d<\/p>

Read more When and why did complying with the Voting Rights Act become unconstitutional?<\/a><\/p>

JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: \u201cOkay. It[] really is, for you.\u201d<\/p>

\u2014 \u00a0 (2013)<\/p><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Plus, the Trump administration announced plans to impose sweeping new tariffs and challenged a refund-related court order. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":17,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[28,22,4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-138","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-amaricas-constitution-2","category-contributor-corner","category-newsletter"],"yoast_head":"\nOpinions expected - American Service Review<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=138\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Opinions expected - American Service Review\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Plus, the Trump administration announced plans to impose sweeping new tariffs and challenged a refund-related court order.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=138\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"American Service Review\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-06-04T13:12:42+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/8c99969a89272deb7e91d5c0698cab8e.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"2000\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"400\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=138#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=138\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb\"},\"headline\":\"Opinions expected\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-06-04T13:12:42+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=138\"},\"wordCount\":2105,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=138#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"Amarica\u2019s Constitution\",\"Contributor Corner\",\"Newsletter\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=138#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=138\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=138\",\"name\":\"Opinions expected - American Service Review\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=138#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=138#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-06-04T13:12:42+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=138#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=138\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=138#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg\",\"width\":1200,\"height\":627},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=138#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Opinions expected\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/\",\"name\":\"American Service Review\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb\",\"name\":\"admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?author=1\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Opinions expected - American Service Review","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=138","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Opinions expected - American Service Review","og_description":"Plus, the Trump administration announced plans to impose sweeping new tariffs and challenged a refund-related court order.","og_url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=138","og_site_name":"American Service Review","article_published_time":"2026-06-04T13:12:42+00:00","og_image":[{"width":2000,"height":400,"url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/8c99969a89272deb7e91d5c0698cab8e.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Est. reading time":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=138#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=138"},"author":{"name":"admin","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#\/schema\/person\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb"},"headline":"Opinions expected","datePublished":"2026-06-04T13:12:42+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=138"},"wordCount":2105,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=138#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg","articleSection":["Amarica\u2019s Constitution","Contributor Corner","Newsletter"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=138#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=138","url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=138","name":"Opinions expected - American Service Review","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=138#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=138#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg","datePublished":"2026-06-04T13:12:42+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#\/schema\/person\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=138#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=138"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=138#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg","width":1200,"height":627},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=138#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Opinions expected"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/","name":"American Service Review","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#\/schema\/person\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb","name":"admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"admin"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/americanservicereview.com"],"url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?author=1"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/138","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=138"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/138\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/17"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=138"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=138"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=138"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}