So this is confusing.
But so are many many things that swirl around in my head.
I just got done spending some time with a dear friend and we were discussing things like laws. Deep and heavy stuff.
So let's say there is a situation where there is not a law, but judge after judge makes decisions that are in black and white in support of a deal that should really be a law.
But somebody else doesn't like those decisions.
And since technically, there is no law, let's just say, here in Iowa, that spells this out in black and white other than court decisions, it is this somebody else's right to argue.
Until this somebody gets somebody else to agree.
But in the mean time, if it's not a law, but judge after reputable judge says it should be a law, why isn't it?
Sorry for this confusion.
Time for some investigation.....