I missed an article from KATC on Tuesday's Oral arguments in the LUS Bond/Loan case in my recent reporting. It's interesting in that plantiff's lawyers are denying that they are paid directly by BellSouth, Cox, or anyone other than Naquin. Now that doesn't mean she isn't being paid nor that they don't know of connections but it is the first denial of any sort that we've heard.
On the topic whether the basic issues of the suit will get a better hearing before the Supreme Court than they did before the Third Circuit, City-parish Attorney Pat Ottinger is cited as saying:
"I think the justices understand. Based on the questions they were asking."That's the impression the newspaper articles leave us with as well. They're asking how the plantiff's lawyers interpretation can make any sense at all. I find it pretty amazing that the lawyers reply is that the law is badly written--essentially admiting that the law, as they read it, doesn't make sense. That's an astonishingly weak defense when the accepted way to analyze of any law is to find the interpretation that does make internally consistent sense.
Even more interesting we get a qoute from Durel on the issues going forward regardless of the outcome of the court's deliberations. (Previous remarks have been attributed to LUS' Huval). He says:
"I think it if was good enough two years ago, a year and a half ago, for our citizens to vote 62 for 38 against, then it's worth looking at what the next possibilities are"PS: Did you know that restops in Texas have WiFi? I didn't before this post. At least the one Hwy 90 rolling into San Antonio from the west does anway.