Originally Posted by
akohekohe
BTW, I don't necessarily think the judge's decision is wrong legally ... his interpretation of the law may be correct even if we don't like the result and we don't agree with the arguments. I have found it absolutely amazing the number of people over on A&S that will tell you what the law means even if they have no case law to back their interpretation up or even when the case law contradicts their interpretation ("that judge didn't know what he was talking about", etc.). Some of the people that do this are even attorneys who should know better. What is worse is that these same people will attack you for saying the law says something, just because they don't like what the law says. Shoot the messenger. The reality is the law means what the courts say it means and not what you think it means, or wish it said, or what some clown on the A&S forum says it means.
There has been a lot of that sort of thinking and pontificating here in AZ concerning the immigration bill passed by the state legislature. When the guts of the bill were overturned by a federal judge, for rather obvious reasons, there were a lot of people saying things like "How can one person (the judge) overturn a law passed by the state?" I laughed, thinking... "What, you'd rather have a few state legislators, with no background in the law, decide on the meaning of the U.S. Constitution?" Gimme a break.
Colorado is a big cycling state, known for its outdoor sports, as well as for its support of individual rights. You'd think it would be possible to deal with this at the state level, as has been suggested.