• Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    10 months ago

    It is a reasonable decision given what the law says, which is all that should matter to a court. No goddamn “spirit of the law” should be invoked, otherwise you enter the realm of the arbitrary. Now, the issue is that the system that should ensure perpetual creative destruction in order to bring out the best and most willing individuals to power has failed to do so, which is the problem we should be focusing on, instead of trying to override reasonable laws in order to prevent this or that lunatic from getting this or that seat

    • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      It is a reasonable decision given what the law says, which is all that should matter to a court. No goddamn “spirit of the law” should be invoked, otherwise you enter the realm of the arbitrary.

      This is the same court that abandoned standing entirely so they could rule in favor of a bigoted website designer. That ship has sailed.

    • quindraco@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      It is a reasonable decision given what the law says, which is all that should matter to a court.

      There is no way to reconcile this decision, which contradicts the law, as “reasonable” with “what the law says”.