[Vision2020] Sitler, Wilson, and Pooh Bear

[Andreas Schou]

> Consider a similar example. A judge is a former member of the KKK. Said
> judge begins to preside over a case involving an African American. The side
> defending the African American asks for the court to consider adding a new
> judge based on the fact that he is a former member of an openly racist
> organization, and might struggle with being objective. Notice, that even
> struggling with objectivity is grounds for dismissal. Juries are picked this
> way, this is a common practice.

The difference is that the law, in this case, specifies whether the
African American is entitled to a particular outcome. The outcome is
adjudicated based on the facts of the case as presented by the
opposing attorneys. That judge must make his decision based on those
facts, and no others.

New Saint Andrews is not entitled to a Conditional Use Permit. They
are currently in violation of the law specifying permitted use for
buildings in the CBD. Because the City Council is, essentially,
choosing whether to waive that law in the case of New Saint Andrews,
they are free to make that decision based on whichever information
they please, or, indeed, no information whatsoever. Allegations of
"bias" are irrelevant, because the law does not constrain the outcomes
which the City Council may choose.

Is that clear enough to yhou?

-- ACS