tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4342651855089974722.post3107325754328492356..comments2023-10-22T07:09:40.782-04:00Comments on Old: Courts reflect popular opinion, not lawStephen Smithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12118017106106571684noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4342651855089974722.post-25817241798307845202008-06-04T13:11:00.000-04:002008-06-04T13:11:00.000-04:00Far be it for me to defend the record of Californi...Far be it for me to defend the record of California courts on property rights issues, but I wasn't meaning that in my comment. What I meant was that under the longstanding legal rule of "exclusio alterius," courts will sometimes interpret a law by looking at what alternatives were decided against at the time that the law was enacted. If the bill says A and B, and the voters or the legislature only enact A, then courts will presume that they purposely chose not to enact B, and that fact has significance for legal interpretation in many cases. That's what I meant: courts might now say "well, we won't interpret the law to protect property rights, because Californians had the opportunity to protect property rights in a meaningful fashion, and chose not to."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com