The thing about "great deference" is that it has always been a rebuttable presumption. A sane court knows that it knows little about alpha amino acid polymers and will still defer to experts--so maybe the earlier case will stem some of the damage.
Our greater problem is that we have fewer and fewer sane courts. Two words: Judge Kacsmaryk . Another two words: This Court. The case about the EPA's "downwind" plans shows this, as does the opioid bankruptcy settlement case, that required a settlement to be approved by ALL creditors, when apparently all but two Canadians and one other person were completely in favor of it.
Wow. Thank you for the excellent writing (not surprising) and generous and thorough explanation.
The thing about "great deference" is that it has always been a rebuttable presumption. A sane court knows that it knows little about alpha amino acid polymers and will still defer to experts--so maybe the earlier case will stem some of the damage.
Our greater problem is that we have fewer and fewer sane courts. Two words: Judge Kacsmaryk . Another two words: This Court. The case about the EPA's "downwind" plans shows this, as does the opioid bankruptcy settlement case, that required a settlement to be approved by ALL creditors, when apparently all but two Canadians and one other person were completely in favor of it.