[curiosity]

IMO if the normal rules of law were being applied to this case—or to the discovery of public documents in Hawaii and elsewhere—then this case would already be proceeding in the courts.

LOL. Based on what? A bunch of hearsay and innuendo?

You obviously know nothing about the normal rules of evidence.

[wildbill]

There is a substantial difference between allowing a case to proceed into discovery under the Federal Rules of Procedure—and the Federal Rules of Evidence which would determine what is hearsay and admissable.

I know a little bit. Enough to know the difference between Rules of Procedure and Rules of Evidence.

I haven’t actually followed the various plaintiffs’ filings in this matter, but so far I think the platintiffs have run into summary judgement decisions against them in which the Court says there is no possible circumstances or evidence that would allow them to prevail.

That’s a pretty tough standard to apply as a hurdle for the plaintiff in any case and most judges are sympathetic to plaintiffs that appear to have any case at all. That’s what I’d call the normal course of legal business.

However, it appears to me that the courts so far are treating this issue like a live hand grenade. No one wants to touch it lest it go off in their face.