{"id":159,"date":"2026-06-08T18:41:38","date_gmt":"2026-06-08T18:41:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=159"},"modified":"2026-06-08T18:41:38","modified_gmt":"2026-06-08T18:41:38","slug":"court-turns-down-appeals-by-elementary-school-student-on-ar-15-hat-death-row-inmate-claiming-racial-discrimination-in-jury-selection","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=159","title":{"rendered":"Court turns down appeals by elementary school student on AR-15 hat, death row inmate claiming racial discrimination in jury selection"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

The Supreme Court on Monday morning turned down, without comment, an appeal by an elementary school student who was barred from wearing a baseball cap with a picture of an AR-15 and the words \u201cCome and Take It\u201d to school. The announcement was part of released on Monday from the justices\u2019 private conference last week. The justices did not add any new cases to their argument docket for the 2026-27 term.<\/p>\n

Read more The campaign to overrule Obergefell<\/a><\/p>\n

The justices will meet again for another conference on Thursday, June 11. Orders from that conference will be released on Monday, June 15, at 9:30 a.m. EDT.<\/p>\n

The justices denied review in C.S. v. McCrumb<\/em>, a dispute that began back in 2022 when a then third-grader identified in court filings only as \u201cC.S.\u201d wore the black baseball cap to school for \u201cHat Day.\u201d School officials asked her to remove the cap; she later went to federal court, where she argued that the officials had violated her right to free speech.<\/p>\n

School officials explained that they had been worried that other children would be upset by C.S.\u2019s hat because there had recently been a shooting at a high school 50 miles away. A federal district court in Michigan ruled for the school officials, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit upheld that decision.<\/p>\n

C.S. came to the Supreme Court in January, asking the justices to take up her case. She pointed to the court\u2019s landmark 1969 decision in , holding that a school district violated the First Amendment rights of two students who were suspended for wearing black armbands to protest the Vietnam War. The court in Tinker<\/em> explained that for \u201cschool officials to justify prohibition of a particular expression of opinion, it must be able to show that its action was caused by something more than a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint.\u201d Here, C.S. , \u201c[b]ased on nothing but their speculation about potential emotional harm, school officials \u2026 crafted an end-run around Tinker<\/em> that silenced a third-grader from proclaiming her demonstrated respect for Second Amendment protected rights.\u201d<\/p>\n

The school officials the unique facts of the case \u2013 including that \u201cHat Day\u201d was a \u201cspecial occasion\u201d on which students were (in a departure from the normal rules) allowed to wear hats during the school day as part of a \u201cGreat Kindness Challenge.\u201d They also contended that the 6th Circuit\u2019s ruling was entirely consistent with decisions by other courts of appeals. Like those courts, they said, the 6th Circuit simply \u201crequired a \u2018reasonable forecast of a substantial disruption\u2019 and examined the records to determine if that standard was satisfied.\u201d But in any event, they added, the school officials are shielded from liability under the doctrine of qualified immunity because it would not have been clearly established \u2013 the standard to overcome immunity \u2013 in 2022 that C.S. had a right to wear a hat with a gun on it to school.<\/p>\n

In a brief order in American Gas Association v. Department of Energy<\/em>, the justices granted review, threw out a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, and sent the case back for that court to reconsider it. The case is a challenge to a set of December 2021 rules that interpreted the Energy Policy Conservation Act to adopt standards for furnaces and water heaters that the members of the gas industry \u201cwill force millions of Americans with gas appliances to either renovate their homes or switch to electric appliances.\u201d<\/p>\n

In an opinion issued late last year, a divided panel of the D.C. Circuit upheld the rules. Citing the Supreme Court\u2019s 2024 ruling in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo<\/em> holding that courts are not required to defer to an agency\u2019s interpretation of an ambiguous statute, the majority acknowledged that the Department of Energy\u2019s \u201cinterpretation of EPCA does not bind us, but \u2018it may be especially informative \u201cto the extent it rests on factual premises within . . . [DOE\u2019s] expertise.\u201d\u2019\u201d Because agencies have that kind of expertise, Judge Robert Wilkins wrote, courts have long regarded their interpretations as persuasive, even if not controlling.<\/p>\n

The challengers in January, asking the justices to weigh in. But in , the Trump administration urged the court to send the case back to the D.C. Circuit. U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer told the justices that the government is \u201creviewing existing rules\u2014including the ones at issue here\u2014to determine whether they pose \u2018an undue burden on the \u2026 use of domestic energy resources\u2019 or otherwise conflict with the Administration\u2019s policy priorities.\u201d The December 2021 rules, Sauer wrote, are \u201cfactually and legally flawed.\u201d<\/p>\n

The court also sent the case of Christopher Coleman, a decorated Army veteran who was sentenced to 46 years in prison for two brutal crimes committed on the same day, back to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit for more proceedings.<\/p>\n

Coleman served in Afghanistan, where he was seriously injured in combat in a rocket attack in Kandahar in January 2011. Coleman suffered a traumatic brain injury and eventually returned to the United States. In March of that year, after he was released from the hospital and while he was on leave from the Army, Coleman \u2013 while \u201chighly intoxicated\u201d \u2013 shot Mary Cook-Moore, resulting in extensive injuries that required ongoing care. Later that day, Coleman and a friend attacked a patron at a bar, severely beating him.<\/p>\n

Read more White House ballroom battle may soon arrive at the Supreme Court<\/a><\/p>\n

Coleman\u2019s appeals and his efforts to obtain post-conviction relief in state court were unsuccessful. Coleman then sought post-conviction relief in federal court in Virginia, which turned him down.<\/p>\n

Coleman then went to the 4th Circuit, which ordered the state to resentence him. It concluded that Coleman\u2019s trial lawyer had performed so poorly that he had violated Coleman\u2019s right under the Sixth Amendment to be represented effectively by a lawyer.<\/p>\n

The state filed earlier this year. It (among other things) that the 4th Circuit had violated the \u201cparty presentation principle\u201d \u2013 the idea, as Rory Little explained last year, that courts can only rely on arguments that the litigants themselves make \u2013 just as it had in an earlier case, , in which the Supreme Court had reversed the 4th Circuit without additional briefing or oral argument. Here, the state argued, although Coleman had not appealed the district court\u2019s ruling that his challenge to one of the judgments against him was filed too late, \u201cthe Fourth Circuit granted relief on that judgment anyway.\u201d<\/p>\n

In a brief order on Monday, the justices returned the case to the 4th Circuit for it to reconsider the case in light of its decision in Clark v. Sweeney<\/em> and the party presentation principle.<\/p>\n

Additionally, and less than two weeks after the Supreme Court threw out a Mississippi man\u2019s conviction and death sentence on the ground that the judge at his 2006 trial had not properly analyzed whether the prosecutor in Pitchford\u2019s case violated the Constitution\u2019s ban on racial discrimination in jury selection, the justices declined to take up the case of that prosecutors at his trial violated the same ban.<\/p>\n

Tony Terrell Clark was convicted and sentenced to death by a jury made up of 11 white jurors and one Black juror. Prosecutors had used seven of their peremptory strikes \u2013 that is, strikes that do not require any explanation \u2013 to eliminate Black members of the potential jury pool. According to Justice Sonia Sotomayor, \u201cthe prosecution also conducted dubious \u2018special investigations into some of the most qualified Black prospective jurors in an attempt to disqualify them,\u2019\u201d and \u201c[m]any of the prosecution\u2019s proffered reasons for striking Black jurors \u2026 applied equally to white jurors that it did not strike.\u201d<\/p>\n

After Clark\u2019s initial appeals were unsuccessful, he sought post-conviction relief in state court, where he argued that prosecutors had violated the Constitution when they eliminated seven Black jurors from the jury pool and that his trial lawyers had failed to provide him with constitutionally adequate representation because they had not properly challenged the prosecutors\u2019 actions. The Mississippi Supreme Court rejected his argument, and the Supreme Court on Monday refused to weigh in.<\/p>\n

Sotomayor not to take up Clark\u2019s case, but she wrote that the standard that the state supreme court applied was \u201cproblematic\u201d and \u201calmost certainly wrong\u201d because it required Clark to show not only that he would have prevailed on his claim that prosecutors violated the Constitution but also that he would have been acquitted. But Clark\u2019s case was not the correct one in which to consider what standard should apply to such cases, she continued, because the Mississippi Supreme Court had also ruled (and Clark did not contest) that Clark\u2019s lawyers\u2019 performance was sufficient.<\/p>\n

The court also turned down, without requiring the federal government to file a brief, a challenge to the constitutionality of the requirement that men \u2013 but not women \u2013 must register for the draft.<\/p>\n

Finally, the justices ordered a relatively rare response to a petition asking them to reconsider their denial of review in Citizens Bank v. Conti<\/em>. The issue in the case is whether the National Bank Act supersedes state laws requiring banks to pay interest on money held in escrow accounts. The court in April turned down a petition from Citizens Bank seeking review of a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit; two weeks later, the bank says, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit issued a decision that is \u201cirreconcilable\u201d with that of the 1st Circuit. Citizens Bank in its petition for rehearing that \u201c[f]urther delay\u201d in resolving that conflict among the courts of appeals (one of the main criteria that the justices consider in deciding whether to grant review) \u201conly worsens the landscape for banks, consumers, and state regulators.\u201d<\/p>\n

Read more Justices reject holding generic pharmaceutical manufacturers liable for decisions of pharmacists about prescribing their products<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Supreme Court on Monday morning turned down, without comment, an appeal by an elementary school student who was barred from wearing a baseball cap with a picture of an AR-15 and the words \u201cCome and Take It\u201d to school. The announcement was part of released on Monday from the justices\u2019 private conference last week. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":158,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-159","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-interesting"],"yoast_head":"\nCourt turns down appeals by elementary school student on AR-15 hat, death row inmate claiming racial discrimination in jury selection - 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=159\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Court turns down appeals by elementary school student on AR-15 hat, death row inmate claiming racial discrimination in jury selection - American Service Review\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"The Supreme Court on Monday morning turned down, without comment, an appeal by an elementary school student who was barred from wearing a baseball cap with a picture of an AR-15 and the words \u201cCome and Take It\u201d to school. The announcement was part of released on Monday from the justices\u2019 private conference last week. […]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=159\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"American Service Review\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-06-08T18:41:38+00:00\" \/>\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=159#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=159\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb\"},\"headline\":\"Court turns down appeals by elementary school student on AR-15 hat, death row inmate claiming racial discrimination in jury selection\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-06-08T18:41:38+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=159\"},\"wordCount\":1685,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=159#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/61552ae28ae2c989530a8c6d5f6404d6.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"Interesting\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=159#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=159\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=159\",\"name\":\"Court turns down appeals by elementary school student on AR-15 hat, death row inmate claiming racial discrimination in jury selection - American Service Review\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=159#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=159#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/61552ae28ae2c989530a8c6d5f6404d6.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-06-08T18:41:38+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=159#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=159\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=159#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/61552ae28ae2c989530a8c6d5f6404d6.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/61552ae28ae2c989530a8c6d5f6404d6.jpg\",\"width\":1200,\"height\":627},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=159#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Court turns down appeals by elementary school student on AR-15 hat, death row inmate claiming racial discrimination in jury selection\"}]},{\"@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":"Court turns down appeals by elementary school student on AR-15 hat, death row inmate claiming racial discrimination in jury selection - 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=159","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Court turns down appeals by elementary school student on AR-15 hat, death row inmate claiming racial discrimination in jury selection - American Service Review","og_description":"The Supreme Court on Monday morning turned down, without comment, an appeal by an elementary school student who was barred from wearing a baseball cap with a picture of an AR-15 and the words \u201cCome and Take It\u201d to school. The announcement was part of released on Monday from the justices\u2019 private conference last week. […]","og_url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=159","og_site_name":"American Service Review","article_published_time":"2026-06-08T18:41:38+00:00","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=159#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=159"},"author":{"name":"admin","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#\/schema\/person\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb"},"headline":"Court turns down appeals by elementary school student on AR-15 hat, death row inmate claiming racial discrimination in jury selection","datePublished":"2026-06-08T18:41:38+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=159"},"wordCount":1685,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=159#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/61552ae28ae2c989530a8c6d5f6404d6.jpg","articleSection":["Interesting"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=159#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=159","url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=159","name":"Court turns down appeals by elementary school student on AR-15 hat, death row inmate claiming racial discrimination in jury selection - American Service Review","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=159#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=159#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/61552ae28ae2c989530a8c6d5f6404d6.jpg","datePublished":"2026-06-08T18:41:38+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#\/schema\/person\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=159#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=159"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=159#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/61552ae28ae2c989530a8c6d5f6404d6.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/61552ae28ae2c989530a8c6d5f6404d6.jpg","width":1200,"height":627},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=159#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Court turns down appeals by elementary school student on AR-15 hat, death row inmate claiming racial discrimination in jury selection"}]},{"@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\/159","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=159"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/159\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/158"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=159"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=159"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=159"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}