Ah, yes, I can see exactly how these could be misinterpreted:

(less important source) https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000199-97ab-d45a-a9bb-97bf843a0000

"How and when will employees be paid? Neither essential nor furloughed employees are authorized to receive compensation during a lapse in government funding. The Government Employee Fair Treatment Act of 2019, 31 U.S.C. § 1341 (GEFTA) statutorily requires retro-active pay for furloughed and essential employees following the end of a lapse in government funding. The exact timeframe for retro-active payment will depend on the length of the lapse in government funding and start date of the enacted continuing resolution or appropriations bill. The normal payroll cycle may be disrupted by a lapse in appropriations and checks may be issued at irregular times."

(more important source, listed in the one above) https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title31-section1341&num=0&edition=prelim

"(2) Each employee of the United States Government or of a District of Columbia public employer furloughed as a result of a covered lapse in appropriations shall be paid for the period of the lapse in appropriations, and each excepted employee who is required to perform work during a covered lapse in appropriations shall be paid for such work, at the employee's standard rate of pay, at the earliest date possible after the lapse in appropriations ends, regardless of scheduled pay dates, and subject to the enactment of appropriations Acts ending the lapse."

Doing a readability check the second is a college-level reading ability. Which just can't stand up to those who only have a xitter-level reading ability.

The lawyers will love the fees they get for this in order to teach them the law, again.