This sort of cutthroat litigation is getting too much. Once upon a time corprations actually did stuff when told by government. If a product or service was dec

This sort of cutthroat litigation is getting too much. Once upon a time corprations actually did stuff when told by government. If a product or service was declared dangerous, it stopped. If a regulator said every room needed a fire extinguisher, the company bought fire extinguishers. Now, every little thing becomes a case for the supreme court, often literally. Insist that safety signs be in spanish? Thats heading to scotus as a profound constitutional crisis at the root of democracy, "Stop selling bombs" ... well that impacts state's rights to regulate non-lethal weapons. Im all for testing constitutionality, but this isnt about that. This is about delaying each and every tiny reg because doing so saves a buck on next week's earnings report. I dont like seeing constitutional issues used as a cover for blatant penny pinching. Amazon sells stuff. Like every other "person" selling stuff they have an obligation not to sell dangerous stuff. It isnt right that they can ignore every warning as they wait out 10+ years of litigation. How about this: Dont think this is constitutional? How about every profit derived from the sale of anything dangerous be put in escrow until the litigation is over? Many states do this with traffic tickets.