Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

UTUSN

(76,730 posts)

6. Question for the Legal eagles - can't an argument for dismissal be

Reply to LetMyPeopleVote (Original post)

Sun Dec 28, 2025, 03:58 PM

1 hr ago

that the contract was with the Kennedy Center, not the current, possibly illegal entity such that breach of contract is not an issue? This would seem to remove the current occupants' potential argument that there is some ideological malice involved. Isn't the legal status of the name change already or soon-to-be challenged referencing the original law establishing the place?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

6 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Trump's Kennedy Center ally hits musician with $1M demand over Christmas Eve cancelation [View all] LetMyPeopleVote 4 hrs ago OP

Blind hypocrisy sunflowerseed 3 hrs ago #1

This right here: odins folly 3 hrs ago #2

Ridiculous C_U_L8R 2 hrs ago #3

They could "perform" and just play diss tracks newdeal2 2 hrs ago #4

This will *really* get more artists to want to perform at the already scorned and blacklisted Trump Kennedy Center. LetMyPeopleVote 2 hrs ago #5

Question for the Legal eagles - can't an argument for dismissal be UTUSN 1 hr ago #6