|
Linkster, I clearly understand that a TRO would do. It is within the court perview to extend a TRO until such time as a full injunction hearing can be held.
I also understand that the TRO would only cover the plaintiffs.
That ain't the point.
Right now there is NOTHING NOTHING NADA NOT A STITCH NOTHING on the books that says there is any real restrictions on this new "law". There is an agreement to not move forward for a selected group of people (the "FSC plaintiffs"), but no real restriction or legal issue on the law. There is a hearing for an injunction in August, but in the mean time, the law stands unemcumbered.
A TRO (even if it had to be renewed every 10 days) would put a legal issue out there that would pretty much make actions from the DOJ look pretty bad, ie: there is a TRO, what the heck are you doing bothering other people?.
Now there is nothing.
Now the DOJ can go wild without restriction, at least until August 15th and probably weeks or months beyond that as the legal arguments go on.
As for "time", well, the FSC had AGES to see all this coming. 95% of what they argued in their brief was known since, what, August last year?
If the FSC truly wanted to represent the entire adult webmaster community, they would have long since figured out how to get us all signed up without issue. Just as the time issue above, I have a feeling that FSC wasn't ready in the slightest for this.
Now we should all cut off our heads?
I don't get it.
Alex
|