Return to September 10th Bill [Final passage at vote]

[Associate Justice PiT]

Policeman: Hey.  You.  Park your car over here.  I want to talk to you.

Driver:  Okay.

Policeman: I am going to write you a ticket.

Driver: For what?

Policeman: For parking in the no parking zone right here.  That's illegal.

Driver: But you just told me to park here.

Policeman: Yup.

Driver: You're going to write me a ticket for something you told me to do?

Policeman: Yes.  You should have known better than to follow an order from your government.

THE
END

And then it goes to court and the ticket gets thrown out.

THE
END

     Which is groovy for the driver who had to waste time & money fighting the ticket.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Policeman: Hey.  You.  Park your car over here.  I want to talk to you.

Driver:  Okay.

Policeman: I am going to write you a ticket.

Driver: For what?

Policeman: For parking in the no parking zone right here.  That's illegal.

Driver: But you just told me to park here.

Policeman: Yup.

Driver: You're going to write me a ticket for something you told me to do?

Policeman: Yes.  You should have known better than to follow an order from your government.

THE
END

And then it goes to court and the ticket gets thrown out.

THE
END

     Which is groovy for the driver who had to waste time & money fighting the ticket.

Which could be applied to any case where a defendant is eventually found innocent...

And it's not like these are poor drivers. They're multi-billion dollar multi-national corporations with hundreds of lawyers.

     & which should be applied to any case where a defendent was found innocent after being charged frivolously.

     Nevertheless, even though the corporations are plenty rich, it kind of sucks that they have to waste time dealing with something that happened through no fault of their own. Per the president's example of a driver being punished for following the government's instructions.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Policeman: Hey.  You.  Park your car over here.  I want to talk to you.

Driver:  Okay.

Policeman: I am going to write you a ticket.

Driver: For what?

Policeman: For parking in the no parking zone right here.  That's illegal.

Driver: But you just told me to park here.

Policeman: Yup.

Driver: You're going to write me a ticket for something you told me to do?

Policeman: Yes.  You should have known better than to follow an order from your government.

THE
END

And then it goes to court and the ticket gets thrown out.

THE
END

     Which is groovy for the driver who had to waste time & money fighting the ticket.

Which could be applied to any case where a defendant is eventually found innocent...

And it's not like these are poor drivers. They're multi-billion dollar multi-national corporations with hundreds of lawyers.

     & which should be applied to any case where a defendent was found innocent after being charged frivolously.

     Nevertheless, even though the corporations are plenty rich, it kind of sucks that they have to waste time dealing with something that happened through no fault of their own. Per the president's example of a driver being punished for following the government's instructions.

So if we pay the corporations' court costs in the event that they're found innocent would you support?

If that's Moderates problem than he could just issue an executive order to that effect.

     Yeah, I would support it in that case. I don't imagine there would be enough cases where this happened to really put a significant dent in the treasury.