A Colloquy of Two Shysters
Mar. 28th, 2006 12:35 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
triadruidApparently the case before the Supreme Court about the jurisdiction of courts to even hear cases of that nature relies in part on testimony from Senators Lindsey Graham, (R-S.C.) and Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), saying in effect that they intended the law to affect cases currently existing.
Except, of course, for the minor detail that the testimony never happened on the Senate floor! It was inserted into the Congressional Record as "live" on their signature, but never took place in person. Opposing it is the (apparently valid) testimony of several Democrats expressing the opinion that it should not affect currently ongoing cases. Whoops.
I'm sure this sort of insertion into the record of addenda happens all the time; as far as anyone is able to tell, though, it's never been used later as part of the legal basis for interpretation of the law.
On the flip side, I just heard from someone at work that they're getting a provision entered into the Missouri Statutes that would impact my department's ability to do good work, but doing so as a "rider" on a larger bill that's destined to pass, to avoid controversy and without fanfare. And because I favor the effect this law would have, I've kept silent about it, even though I generally oppose this sort of legerdemain. I'm not sure how I feel about that.
Except, of course, for the minor detail that the testimony never happened on the Senate floor! It was inserted into the Congressional Record as "live" on their signature, but never took place in person. Opposing it is the (apparently valid) testimony of several Democrats expressing the opinion that it should not affect currently ongoing cases. Whoops.
I'm sure this sort of insertion into the record of addenda happens all the time; as far as anyone is able to tell, though, it's never been used later as part of the legal basis for interpretation of the law.
On the flip side, I just heard from someone at work that they're getting a provision entered into the Missouri Statutes that would impact my department's ability to do good work, but doing so as a "rider" on a larger bill that's destined to pass, to avoid controversy and without fanfare. And because I favor the effect this law would have, I've kept silent about it, even though I generally oppose this sort of legerdemain. I'm not sure how I feel about that.
