[tacticalogic]

“The wording in the law is ‘should refrain,’” Florida Solicitor General Allen Winsor told the justices of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, according to The Associated Press.”It’s not mandating anything. It’s recommending. The use of the term is critical in this case.”

So "should refrain" is not an order, but "we don't need you to do that" is?

[Tilted Irish Kilt]

tacticalogic :" So "should refrain" is not an order, but "we don't need you to do that" is? "

I prefer to follow the suggested quote of the director of NSA in his appearance before Congress ,
and offer " the least untruthful answer " , and let them figure it out for themselves.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

“The wording in the law is ‘should refrain,’” Florida Solicitor General Allen Winsor told the justices of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, according to The Associated Press.”It’s not mandating anything. It’s recommending. The use of the term is critical in this case.”

So "should refrain" is not an order, but "we don't need you to do that" is?

"we don't need you to do that” is not only an order, it’s a retroactive order - it not only countermands the suggestion implied in “let us know if you find out which way he went,” and places you in the wrong for having started “to do that.”

So the solution is simple - pass a “we don’t need you to do that” amendment to the law, and whatever was suggested as being wrong will be illegal - probably even unconstitutional, for all you and I know. And effective ex post facto.