{"id":155,"date":"2026-06-08T13:10:01","date_gmt":"2026-06-08T13:10:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=155"},"modified":"2026-06-08T13:10:01","modified_gmt":"2026-06-08T13:10:01","slug":"white-house-ballroom-battle-may-soon-arrive-at-the-supreme-court","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=155","title":{"rendered":"White House ballroom battle may soon arrive at the Supreme Court"},"content":{"rendered":"

We are expecting 23 more opinions in argued cases by early July. In case you missed it, Amy wrote last week about the most important cases yet to be decided.<\/p>

Read more Justices reject holding generic pharmaceutical manufacturers liable for decisions of pharmacists about prescribing their products<\/a><\/p>

At the Court<\/h2>

Orders from the justices\u2019 June 4 conference are expected this morning at 9:30 a.m. EDT.<\/p><\/div><\/div>

The court has indicated that it may announce opinions on Thursday at 10 a.m. EDT. We will be live blogging that morning beginning at 9:30.<\/p><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

Morning Reads<\/h2>

Trump administration tells appeals court White House ballroom project must continue<\/h3>

Mike Scarcella, Reuters<\/svg><\/span><\/p>

On Friday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit heard argument on a challenge to \u201cconstruction of a $400 million ballroom on the site of the White House\u2019s demolished East Wing.\u201d A lawyer for the Trump administration told that court that construction has \u201cgone too far to be stopped\u201d and that \u201ccourts have no role in weighing the project,\u201d according to Reuters. A lawyer from the \u201cNational Trust for Historic Preservation, a nonprofit group that campaigns to protect significant American sites,\u201d countered that \u201cthe president has no \u2018free-floating\u2019 power to build without appropriations.\u201d \u201cThe panel, which heard arguments for more than two hours, could issue a more significant ruling in the next few weeks, which could be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.\u201d<\/p><\/div><\/div>

Seventh Circuit keeps journalists barred from Indiana executions<\/h3>

Destiny Devooght, Courthouse News Service<\/p>

On Friday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit \u201cupheld an Indiana law disallowing media access to witness state executions, finding the First Amendment does not guarantee special access to press,\u201d according to Courthouse News Service. A group of news outlets, including the Associated Press, had argued that the First Amendment allows access for journalists in executions in a lawsuit filed \u201cafter the state resumed executions following a 15-year break.\u201d But \u201cthe panel\u2019s majority found that the news outlets\u2019 right of access argument \u2013 based on the Supreme Court\u2019s recognition of a limited right to access certain governmental proceedings \u2013 stops short of applying to executions\u201d because executions don\u2019t \u201cresemble a court proceeding.\u201d<\/p><\/div><\/div>

How The Supreme Court Is Tightening Early Prison Release<\/h3>

Jamiles Lartey, The Marshall Project<\/p>

In The Marshall Project\u2019s Closing Argument newsletter, Jamiles Lartey reflected on recent Supreme Court rulings on the First Step Act, which passed in 2018 with bipartisan support and which enables \u201cincarcerated people to take their compassionate release claims\u201d \u2013 that is, claims presenting an \u201cextraordinary and compelling reason\u201d to release them from prison early \u2013 \u201cdirectly to a judge\u201d rather than awaiting action from the Bureau of Prisons, as they had to do in the past. The First Step Act \u201chardly opened the floodgates, but it did lead to a roughly 20-fold increase in successful release motions.\u201d However, in two May rulings, the court \u201ctighten[ed] the mechanisms of compassionate release in the federal system,\u201d holding \u201cthat compassionate release cannot be used to revisit doubts about a conviction, or to reduce a sentence that would be considered excessive by today\u2019s penalties.\u201d<\/p><\/div><\/div>

The Supreme Court Refutes Its Critics<\/h3>

The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board<\/svg><\/span><\/p>

In a June 4 editorial, the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board contended that the Supreme Court\u2019s rulings in favor of a generic pharmaceuticals manufacturer, the SEC, and the FCC \u201crefute\u201d the idea that justices are trying to \u201ccurry[] favor with \u2018moneyed interests.\u2019\u201d The court is not \u201cin the pocket of corporate interests\u201d or \u201con a mission to \u2018gut\u2019 the administrative state,\u201d as critics have contended, the Editorial Board wrote. \u201cNo, the Justices are applying the law and precedents as they read them.\u201d<\/p><\/div><\/div>

Outrage Over Justice Alito\u2019s Son Distracts From Real Scandals<\/h3>

Gabe Roth, Bloomberg<\/svg><\/span><\/p>

In a column for Bloomberg, Gabe Roth, the founder and executive director of Fix the Court, highlighted the outrage that followed when NOTUS broke the news on May 28 that Justice Samuel Alito\u2019s son is working in the Treasury Department. Some claimed that Alito should have recused himself from the tariffs case even though, as Roth noted, \u201che didn\u2019t need to under the court\u2019s legal and ethical framework.\u201d According to Roth, this and other recent debates over recusals involve overstated scandals and \u201cdistract from the necessary work of reform,\u201d which he believes should focus on issues like the \u201cjustices\u2019 acceptance of gifts.\u201d<\/p><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

On Site<\/h2>
Opinion Analysis<\/span>

Justices validate SEC\u2019s use of disgorgement in securities enforcement<\/h3>

By Ronald Mann<\/p>

In Sripetch v. SEC, the court validated the SEC\u2019s ability to use \u201cdisgorgement\u201d to force a wrongdoer to turn over its profits to the government without showing harm caused to the wrongdoer\u2019s customers.<\/p><\/div>

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Opinion Analysis<\/span>

Justices reject holding generic pharmaceutical manufacturers liable for decisions of pharmacists about prescribing their products<\/h3>

By Ronald Mann<\/p>

On Thursday, the court decided Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA v. Amarin Pharma, which was argued on April 29. The opinion of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson for a unanimous court rejected the idea that a generics pharmaceutical manufacturer (Hikma) can be held responsible for infringements of patents held by the branded manufacturer (Amarin) based on the decisions of doctors and pharmacies to use the generic compound for patented uses of the drug.<\/p>

Read more Justices validate SEC\u2019s use of disgorgement in securities enforcement<\/a><\/p><\/div>

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

On D-Day, did FDR violate the establishment clause?<\/h3>

By Jordan Lorence<\/p>

Late in the day on June 6, 1944, following a day of fierce combat between Allied troops and Nazi forces on Normandy\u2019s beaches, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt shared a prayer with the nation and urged Americans to ask for God\u2019s support in the war. In a column for SCOTUSblog, Jordan Lorence revisited Roosevelt\u2019s prayer and reflected on the country\u2019s shifting understanding of the proper relationship between church and state.<\/p><\/div>

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

Podcasts<\/h2>
Advisory Opinions<\/span>

Getting Out of the Redistricting Business<\/h3>

Sarah Isgur and David French discuss the Supreme Court\u2019s Alabama redistricting decision, a plea deal from the former national security adviser, and the best legal movies ever made.<\/p><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

A Closer Look<\/div>

Opinion Assignments<\/h3><\/div>

As we enter peak opinion-release season, we thought it\u2019d be a good idea to discuss how the justices typically choose who writes which opinion. This is a very big deal: Whoever writes the opinion, after all, gets to control the narrative.<\/p>

The most senior justice in the majority gets to assign the author of that opinion (so if the chief is in the majority, it\u2019s always him), and he or she can either assign it to him or herself or another justice who that person thinks will be able to get the most votes behind the majority opinion. This was not always the case. Before Chief Justice John Marshall\u2019s appointment in 1801, the court followed the seriatim<\/em> tradition, in which each justice wrote and delivered a separate individual opinion. Marshall recognized that the seriatim<\/em> approach created uncertainty about the legal principle for which a decision stood and diminished the court\u2019s ability to establish authority without an institutional voice. So he persuaded his colleagues to adopt a single written \u201copinion of the court,\u201d and that has effectively been the case ever since. (President Thomas Jefferson, for his part, complained in one letter that under Marshall, the court\u2019s opinions were delivered \u201chuddled up in conclave, perhaps by a majority of one\u201d and shielded by \u201cthe silent acquiescence of lazy or timid associates.\u201d)<\/p>

The justices decide who will write which opinion after they vote in conference. The goal is to make this as equitable as possible: chief justices have thus tended to assign to each justice about the same number of opinions. But assigning opinions is also strategic: the assigning justice might choose someone whose views align closely with the majority\u2019s reasoning, or alternatively assign it to a justice whose vote seems uncertain, hoping the responsibility will sway his or her commitment to the majority position. And chief justices have long reserved the highest-profile cases for themselves. According to an analysis of Roberts\u2019 tenure by Linda Greenhouse back in 2014, he authored 25 of the 85 most salient opinions in which he was in the majority, or about three times more than he would have written under an even distribution (which is consistent with most chief justices before him).<\/p>

By custom, a new justice\u2019s first opinion assignment is typically in a deliberately uncontroversial case, and all of the other justices then make an effort to join it. When Justice William Brennan issued his first decision in 1956 (an 8-1 tax ruling) the lone dissenter, Justice John Harlan II, wrote him a private note saying he was \u201csorry\u201d that he could not \u201csign up at once with your first.\u201d More recently, Justice Sonia Sotomayor\u2019s first opinion drew a concurrence from Justice Clarence Thomas that criticized the court\u2019s practice of using \u201cvalue judgments,\u201d while Justice Elena Kagan\u2019s first was met with a dissent from Justice Antonin Scalia. It is not clear if they received written (or oral) apologies.<\/p><\/div><\/div>

SCOTUS Quote<\/h2>

JUSTICE KAGAN: \u201cIf he had cocaine in his sock, he would probably be convicted of possession of cocaine.\u201d<\/p>

MS. KOVNER: \u201cBut \u2013\u201d<\/p>

JUSTICE KAGAN: \u201cHe was convicted of paraphernalia here because he had four pills of Adderall, which if you go to half the colleges in America, people \u2013 you know, and just randomly pick somebody, there would be a decent chance \u2013\u201d<\/p>

Read more On D-Day, did FDR violate the establishment clause?<\/a><\/p>

\u2014 (2015)<\/p><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Plus, how opinions are assigned.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":17,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[7,4,6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-155","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-advisory-opinions","category-newsletter","category-opinion-analysis"],"yoast_head":"\nWhite House ballroom battle may soon arrive at the Supreme Court - 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=155\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"White House ballroom battle may soon arrive at the Supreme Court - American Service Review\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Plus, how opinions are assigned.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=155\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"American Service Review\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-06-08T13:10:01+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/2a087616fe56ccacb93bac347f22a010.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"2000\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1333\" \/>\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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=155#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=155\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb\"},\"headline\":\"White House ballroom battle may soon arrive at the Supreme Court\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-06-08T13:10:01+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=155\"},\"wordCount\":1579,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=155#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"Advisory Opinions\",\"Newsletter\",\"Opinion Analysis\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=155#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=155\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=155\",\"name\":\"White House ballroom battle may soon arrive at the Supreme Court - American Service Review\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=155#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=155#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-06-08T13:10:01+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=155#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=155\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=155#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=155#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"White House ballroom battle may soon arrive at the Supreme Court\"}]},{\"@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":"White House ballroom battle may soon arrive at the Supreme Court - 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=155","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"White House ballroom battle may soon arrive at the Supreme Court - American Service Review","og_description":"Plus, how opinions are assigned.","og_url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=155","og_site_name":"American Service Review","article_published_time":"2026-06-08T13:10:01+00:00","og_image":[{"width":2000,"height":1333,"url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/2a087616fe56ccacb93bac347f22a010.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=155#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=155"},"author":{"name":"admin","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#\/schema\/person\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb"},"headline":"White House ballroom battle may soon arrive at the Supreme Court","datePublished":"2026-06-08T13:10:01+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=155"},"wordCount":1579,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=155#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg","articleSection":["Advisory Opinions","Newsletter","Opinion Analysis"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=155#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=155","url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=155","name":"White House ballroom battle may soon arrive at the Supreme Court - American Service Review","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=155#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=155#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg","datePublished":"2026-06-08T13:10:01+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#\/schema\/person\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=155#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=155"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=155#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=155#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"White House ballroom battle may soon arrive at the Supreme Court"}]},{"@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\/155","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=155"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/155\/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=155"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=155"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=155"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}