Murray Quoted in Washington Business Journal About Amazon’s Protest of Cloud Computing Contract Award
26 November 2019
Washington Business Journal
Partner Frank Murray was quoted in a Washington Business Journal article, “Amazon’s JEDI protest relies heavily on Trump. But it might not get to argue that point,” about what evidence the Court of Federal Claims might consider in Amazon Web Services battle to overturn the Pentagon’s award of a $10 billion cloud-computing contract to arch-rival Microsoft. Amazon has argued that President Trump’s antipathy for Jeff Bezos was a factor in the award and wants to submit videos of Trump rallies into the record.
“I can guarantee you that the Trump rally is not part of the administrative record,” Murray said. “So what you have to do as a protester at the Court of Federal Claims is make a motion to supplement the administrative record to bring in outside evidence and argue that it’s needed by the judge to resolve the issues in dispute.”
That’s where lawyers for both AWS and the government are expected to have their fiercest legal confrontations: whether the president’s comments should be counted as evidence in an evaluation of the acquisition process, Murray said.
Murray said he did not know of a legal precedent that involving the political volatility or the animus attributed to one company that is featured in the JEDI case. But it might not matter, given the bias argument likely won’t be a determining factor of the case, but rather a supplementing one. “I do think, in some regards, that this is very unusual, uncharted territory,” he said. “I still think that to the extent that the bias argument gets traction, it still needs to find some footing in the evaluation record.”
(Subscription required)
“I can guarantee you that the Trump rally is not part of the administrative record,” Murray said. “So what you have to do as a protester at the Court of Federal Claims is make a motion to supplement the administrative record to bring in outside evidence and argue that it’s needed by the judge to resolve the issues in dispute.”
That’s where lawyers for both AWS and the government are expected to have their fiercest legal confrontations: whether the president’s comments should be counted as evidence in an evaluation of the acquisition process, Murray said.
Murray said he did not know of a legal precedent that involving the political volatility or the animus attributed to one company that is featured in the JEDI case. But it might not matter, given the bias argument likely won’t be a determining factor of the case, but rather a supplementing one. “I do think, in some regards, that this is very unusual, uncharted territory,” he said. “I still think that to the extent that the bias argument gets traction, it still needs to find some footing in the evaluation record.”
(Subscription required)
People
Related News
12 May 2025
In the News
Judith Waltz Comments on Provider Settlement After Self-Disclosure
Foley & Lardner LLP partner Judith Waltz commented on a recent settlement by a provider with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (OIG) in the Report on Medicare Compliance article, "After Self-Disclosure, Provider Settles Case Over Failure to Report, Return Overpayments."
12 May 2025
In the News
Foley's Digital Infrastructure Arrivals Featured Across Legal Press
Foley & Lardner LLP partners Daniel Farris and Joe McClendon are featured in legal press for their arrival to the firm.
07 May 2025
In the News
Foley Attorneys Featured in Q&A on CPSC Oversight of Cosmetics Industry
Foley & Lardner LLP attorneys Erik Swanholt, Kristin McGaver, and Mikaela Mitchum are featured in a Cosmetics Design Q&A on what industry brands need to know regarding oversight from the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission.