Page 60 and the next several pages specifically explain what the court thinks arguably could violate the language of the statute. It is just one man's read of course, albeit a federal judge. But to me it underscores that some of the language is vague and could be applied in an undesirable way.
__________________
Four phrases I nave coined that sum up today's hobby:
No consequences.
Stuff trumps all.
The flip is the commoodity.
Animal Farm grading.
Last edited by Peter_Spaeth; 02-12-2023 at 02:42 PM.
|