The judge did make suggestions on how the ordinance could possibly be fixed. But I'm not sure her suggestions would do the trick -- and she seemed skeptical also.
What I quoted is from Black's ancient 2nd edition.
Why would a legislature create a legal fiction? Legislatures do not need to assume something that is not true in order to make a situation fit an abstract rule.
What are some of the legal fictions legislatures have supposedly concocted...
There's no need to bother me with nonsense. As obvious to everyone who can read and comprehend English, the words, "none of the funds appropriated under this title shall be used in programs where abortion is a method of family planning” do not mean or imply that doctors are forbidden to...
I am embarrassed to admit that for a long time I have been under the impression that there are a lot more children available for adoption in the US than there are, even more than 700,000. I've quoted figures on other boards; I don't know where I got them, and no one corrected me. Really, I...
No, you need to read and understand the Tampa ordinance. It does not specify that the communication need be in a "therapeutic setting". It is explicitly a speaker-based and content-based restriction on speech.
Let's say that I am a provider as the ordinance defines, and I have developed a close...
Trepanning, shock therapy, lobotomies, etc., are different kinds of things than the talking and listening that a provider -- such as specified in the Tampa ordinance -- engages in. Such a provider as specified in the Tampa ordinance need not touch the body of the patient. The Tampa ordinance...
A legal fiction is a fact assumed or created by courts[1] which is then used in order to help reach a decision or to apply a legal rule.
Legal fiction - Wikipedia
I guess a legislature can write and pass any group of words, but I don't know of any example where a legislature created an...
Bloodletting and trepanning are different kinds of things than speaking to another person, and banning the former is a different sort of thing than banning the communication of certain otherwise lawful words or messages. Right? In fact, there is a provision of the US Constitution that proscribes...
(1) There is no such selfish rationale that is part of any legal precedent.
(2) Parents can become grandparents without needing to subject their minor children involuntarily to medical procedures or psychotherapies.