4 ms·
My interpretation could be and probably is wrong. I'm not sure it's super important to the point I'm trying to make, though, especially given that Newsom's expl
by ribosometronome 3y ago
My interpretation could be and probably is wrong. I'm not sure it's super important to the point I'm trying to make, though, especially given that Newsom's explicit argument is that this is unnecessary because we already can liberally interpret some categories to cover this.
I'm more getting at why value conciseness over clarity? Even if "genetic information" doesn't cover them presently, there's no reason it couldn't to achieve Gavin Newsom's new goal of not having laws be overly explicit.
- belltaco 3y agohttps://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/dec/30/anti-sharia-laws-trump-muslims https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/dec/30/anti-sharia-...