It seems the flaw is an assumption of good will among principal leaders. I would think there would be a mechanism to invoke “out of bounds” or “beyond the pale”. Immediately I see two problems why judges are so cautiously toeing the line of propriety. The proactive nature of such a ruling could be abused. Also an appeal would likely find…
It seems the flaw is an assumption of good will among principal leaders. I would think there would be a mechanism to invoke “out of bounds” or “beyond the pale”. Immediately I see two problems why judges are so cautiously toeing the line of propriety. The proactive nature of such a ruling could be abused. Also an appeal would likely find the ruling flawed. There needs to be a faster way to get ahead of irreversible damage, but I don’t know what it is.
It seems the flaw is an assumption of good will among principal leaders. I would think there would be a mechanism to invoke “out of bounds” or “beyond the pale”. Immediately I see two problems why judges are so cautiously toeing the line of propriety. The proactive nature of such a ruling could be abused. Also an appeal would likely find the ruling flawed. There needs to be a faster way to get ahead of irreversible damage, but I don’t know what it is.