3 ms·
The TSA has raised these arguments in 4 separate circuits and now have lost in 4 separate circuits. Perhaps it actually is a no-brainer.
by tssva 3y ago
The TSA has raised these arguments in 4 separate circuits and now have lost in 4 separate circuits. Perhaps it actually is a no-brainer.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> TSA has raised these arguments in 4 separate circuits and now have lost in 4 separate circuits. Perhaps it actually is a no-brainer. The lower court ruled for the government. And despite noting this concurrence in the second paragraph of their opinion [1], the court continued for pages in its analysis. [1] https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2023/06/26/22-15402.pdf https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2023/06/26/2...
- nescioquid 3y agoCleaning dung off the wall takes a lot more effort than putting it there in the first place. I wouldn't confuse prolixity for ambiguity, in case that was your point.
- dragonwriter 3y ago> The lower court ruled for the government. Yeah, trial courts sometimes get no-brainers wrong, that’s significant enough that there is a reason the first level of appeal is “as of right” and not discretionary.