Well not being any expert, I'd say that given how some have said that this agreement gives them time to get their houses in order, ie the records and such.. this part of the agreement should make them a wee bit nervous.

3. The Government takes the position that the regulations codified at 28 CFR, part 75, et seq., are in effect as of June 23, 2005, and reserves the right, after the expiration of this agreement or the denial of a preliminary injunction, to prosecute or otherwise commence enforcement proceedings with respect to any violation that occurs on or after June 23, 2005 (including any violation that may occur during the period of this agreement).
Now that seems to say to me, and I am no lawyer either, that should the TRO be denied, anyone of the FSC who was in violation at any time after JUne 23 is still liable to prosecution so I would say that if the FSC believes they can win, why the deal? It gets the members really nothing, no added time as the government has reserved the right to prosecute anyone who is in violation as of yesterday, and now with a nice list they can easily find some targets...

but what is worse in my mind here, is that the agreement has given many of its members a false sense of safety. That many who might have otherwise pulled their sites pending the outcome of the actual TRO hearing, have left it up under the impression that this deal gives them time to fix what might be needed, when in essence it doesn't.. least according to that one paragraph which the FSC agreed to.

I don't get it, maybe Chad can enlighten folks a bit, seeing as how he is a lawyer with some experience in all this...

just my opinion though.

Ian