Thanks. I think that makes sense, and it certainly makes CFJ 3726 more
interesting. I'll assume you're right unless I hear more about it.
On Sun, 2 Jun 2019 at 01:13, Aris Merchant
wrote:
> Y’all, I think you’re overthinking this. “authorize” isn’t necessarily a
> synonym for “enable”. According
Y’all, I think you’re overthinking this. “authorize” isn’t necessarily a
synonym for “enable”. According to Google, the definition is “give official
permission for or approval to”. I think telling someone they’re required to
do something as part of their job counts as “authorization” to do it
Interesting catch! Is there any argument that, in this circumstance, MUST
implies CAN? I think probably that argument doesn’t work, but here’s what it
might say:
There is no method for the Referee to discharge eir mandatory duties except by
imposing the Cold Hand of Justice when warranted.
In preparing judgements for CFJs 3726 and 3727, I realized I don't
know why the Referee CAN impose the Cold Hand of Justice.
R2478 says the investigator SHALL, but not that e CAN.
R2557 says that e CAN do so if the rules "authorize" em to, but I
don't see any rules authorizing anyone to do so.
4 matches
Mail list logo
