결론에서 But these facts do not control the motion before the Court. The government has failed to establish that an injunction will prevent irreparable harm. Its motion is accordingly DENIED. 이라는데? 판결문은 다 못 봤지만 대충 국가에 해가 되는 내용은 맞는데 정부가 금지명령으로 피해를 막는다는 논리를 확립하지 못 했으니 거부한다 라는 내용으로 끝나네. 오히려 문제 될거 없지 않나
저 판결 때린 판사가 볼튼은 틀렸다고 말했음
"He opted out of the review process before its conclusion. Unilateral fast-tracking carried the benefit of publicity and sales, and the cost of substantial risk exposure. This was Bolton's bet: If he is right and the book does not contain classified information, he keeps the upside mentioned above; but if he is wrong, he stands to lose his profits from the book deal, exposes himself to criminal liability, and imperils national security," Lamberth wrote. "Bolton was wrong."
he is right and the book does not contain classified information, he keeps the upside mentioned above; but if he is wrong, he stands to lose his profits from the book deal, exposes himself to criminal liability, and imperils national security. Bolton was wrong.