I suspect that's her goal, even if implicit, to take it to the supreme court to get her precedent. It's a poor strategy though, and shows a fundamental misunder

I suspect that's her goal, even if implicit, to take it to the supreme court to get her precedent. It's a poor strategy though, and shows a fundamental misunderstanding of her odds and position. The emphasis on the supreme court tends to screw people up. A "vanity" as it were. She was chosen as a celebrity on the issue, due to her paper and outspokenness, not her technically prowess. A fatal flaw with most political appointees. I suspect some of her supporters in the admin likely hoped she would be less controlling on cases but be dogged in pursuit. But perhaps others thought the opposite. An incompetent zealot, can be a perfect buffer. The Activision case is a fiasco, it's huge at 75b, there's lots of nice evidence, etc. It upends her core selling points.