the agency's justification for was not suitable

GoodTaste

Key Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2016
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Chinese
Home Country
China
Current Location
China
U.S. District Judge Matthew Schelp in the Eastern District of Missouri wrote in his ruling that regulations handed down by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid earlier this month were issued improperly. The agency did not get approval from Congress to mandate vaccinations for health care workers, Schelp wrote, which he argued was necessary given the mandate's "vast economic and political significance." The rules were also issued without a standard period for public comment, which Schelp said the agency's justification for was not suitable.

Source: USAToday Federal judge blocks Biden vaccine mandate for health care workers in 10
states

Should "the agency's justification for was not suitable" be "the agency's justification for it (the mandate) was not suitable"? That is, "it" should have been there and is not ommisible.
I am not absolutely sure.
 

probus

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Member Type
Retired English Teacher
Native Language
English
Home Country
Canada
Current Location
Canada
The "it" was (and must be) omitted because this is reported speech.
 

jutfrank

VIP Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2014
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
English
Home Country
England
Current Location
England
It isn't to do with reported speech. It's that the final part of the last sentence is a relative clause. The complement of the preposition for is the pronoun which. The pronoun which refers to the fact that the rules were issued without a standard period for public comment. Schelp considers the agency's justifications for its actions unsuitable.
 

Tdol

Editor, UsingEnglish.com
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
Japan
Moving for to before which might make it easier to follow.
 
Top