But often it's not, and like anything, the way we do it is figure it out in court. Which is crazy but that's it.
Our system 'incentivizes rule testing' because it's the only way to find out where the boundaries are.
It's ridiculous: the best lawyers in the world enact laws that are summarily overthrown by other lawyers who are Judges. That shouldn't be possible.
It would be cool if lawmakers and the judiciary had a way of finding the limits without having to test them and wait years in court.
We have to spend 10 years for the courts to decide what the hell we meant when we wrote copyright law? It's just dumb.
At very least, for national security we could have a Judicial oversight team who can maybe make rulings and then clear actions before they are taken.
After a few nullifications the legislators will learn to be more careful. Painful but positive process.
But, but, but, muh criminalz amok! You say. And yet convictions are thrown out all the time for unlawful searches.
All laws are unclear.
Particularly the most important one, the Constitution.
They are forever in refinement.
But often it's not, and like anything, the way we do it is figure it out in court. Which is crazy but that's it.
Our system 'incentivizes rule testing' because it's the only way to find out where the boundaries are.
It's ridiculous: the best lawyers in the world enact laws that are summarily overthrown by other lawyers who are Judges. That shouldn't be possible.
It would be cool if lawmakers and the judiciary had a way of finding the limits without having to test them and wait years in court.
We have to spend 10 years for the courts to decide what the hell we meant when we wrote copyright law? It's just dumb.
At very least, for national security we could have a Judicial oversight team who can maybe make rulings and then clear actions before they are taken.