LOL! You missed the OJ trial, I assume.
Is it still going on? If not, it stands to reason there were time limits.
Of course in actuality there are no such thing as time limits in trials. Not on this planet. Maybe where you come from.
The judge sets such limits, subject to review.
There are relevancy limits, however. Demanding proof that the law exists is irrelevant.
Maybe where you come from. -- We have a US Constitution to honor, and it is relevant to argue that point before the jury, within time limits.
If the law didn't exist, there wouldn't have been grounds for an indictment and the case wouldn't have been brought to trial.
So you claim. I claim the right to present my case before an informed & impartial jury, as per the 6/7th amendments..
Why do you oppose this freedom?