[rollingdeep]

>The outsourcing companies argued that the law would apply to them only if the American workers who were displaced by visa holders they hired had originally been their employees, not Disney’s. Judge Presnell was persuaded by that argument, although he did not entirely reject the idea that the Americans were “adversely affected” by being fired.

>>The decision was a broad victory for Disney and its contractors, but Judge Presnell left the former workers a small window to amend their lawsuits and to try again.

The lower court’s decision was based on a literal technicality loophole in the regulation where two companies are involved instead of one. An appeal was left open where a higher court may choose to use more leeway in interpreting the spirit and intent of the law and whether that technicality is skirting the law.

Please don’t post misinformation and straw man arguments instead of the OP’s intent.