I'm pretty sure that if the justices laugh when you are presenting your "case" it isn't a good thing. And I think you are supposed to argue points of law and not campaign slogans, but ya know... whaddu I know.
Today Gallegos argued his "case" before the First District Court of Appeals. I kinda thought Ken Miller would be there to lend him moral support. But no.
Back in 2005, Gallegos said that when the judge tossed his precious Palco suit, the judge sent a signal that Pacific Lumber was "totally immune from lying. People out there are getting permits all over the place, thinking they have an obligation to tell the government the truth," Gallegos said. "This is not the law, in my opinion, and if am wrong, it is an outrage because it rewards deceit." This is all part of the "Right to Lie" talking points he was given.
That's essentially the same thing he said today, that unless the demurrer was overturned "These proceedings will never have legitimacy... Because anyone can commit fraud ...Because people cannot seek redress, if they can't no one can..." ...and more along those lines. I'll post whatever transcripts I can get hold of, my notes are woefully incomplete..
The Court of Appeals now has 90 days to render a decision. God help them, now that they know that if they rule the wrong way the whole system will disintegrate.