back in the day, when law was something mostly lawyers worried about (and their clients) there were often little articles that listed "outdated laws still on the books." These tended to be things that once they were banned by the courts (or maybe just got outmoded: restrictions on making buggy whips), no one bothered to repeal OR enforce. Sounds like what is happening in Petaluma. THINK of the ways DOJ could start suing places that still had these kinds of lingering but useless laws. Just for the sake of putting states or cities or villages in their place.
You hit so many spots I feel.
back in the day, when law was something mostly lawyers worried about (and their clients) there were often little articles that listed "outdated laws still on the books." These tended to be things that once they were banned by the courts (or maybe just got outmoded: restrictions on making buggy whips), no one bothered to repeal OR enforce. Sounds like what is happening in Petaluma. THINK of the ways DOJ could start suing places that still had these kinds of lingering but useless laws. Just for the sake of putting states or cities or villages in their place.
Petaluma won YEARS ago when they restricted how fast development could happen so infrastructure could keep up. They’ll win again.