the agency's justification for was not suitable

[GoodTaste]

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]

The "it" was (and must be) omitted because this is reported speech.

 

[jutfrank]

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]

Moving for to before which might make it easier to follow.