But not even, in this case: the majority “couched” its reasoning in a clear statement of the law. “Jargon” to me suggests obfuscation or highly technical language. I can say that the dissent of KBJ did one of those two things though. But not through legal jargon, just through whiny leftist horseshit.
Yeah they tend to do that.
But not even, in this case: the majority “couched” its reasoning in a clear statement of the law. “Jargon” to me suggests obfuscation or highly technical language. I can say that the dissent of KBJ did one of those two things though. But not through legal jargon, just through whiny leftist horseshit.
I think they just said what they said without reading the actual thing. It was like a lnee jerk reaction that things should be that way.