I'm still trying to figure out what the hell I'm doing here. The last four posts, in particularly the one on standing, were really long and boring. I doubt anyone wants to read them. I sure don't. I think I need to get more into the policy-type arguments, such as I did at the end of part 4 of 4, to make this material readable.
I'll work on doing less listing, giving better examples and actually talking about something instead of reciting blackletter law. Afterall, I listened to recitation of blackletter law all morning and it bored me almost to death, well at least almost to sleep.
If anyone has a suggestion about a direction I should turn, please let me know. If I got the law wrong, PLEASE TELL ME. If you have a suggestion as to how I could better explain something, once again your opinions are encouraged.
Perhaps this will help clarify some of your issues with gerrymandering and political questions
ReplyDeletehttp://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/politicalquestions.html
I know that in some cases the courts are willing to get to the merits of the case on other grounds in order to deal with it. However, apparently for the bar, that's not something we need to know. I share your frustration.