They just refused to hold up the certification. They are operating as though it is not going to have a negetive impact no matter which way the decision goes, which is correct.
This is too much legalese. I'm a science teacher. I'll be glad to explain how angiosperms and gymnosperms differ.
Thanks for your explanation.
To make sure I'm clear: the thing that was denied is a request for an injunction to stop the certification process. That's all. The certification process, as we know, is largely irrelevant to the overall case.
And they accepted the Texas case. It is ON THE DOCKET!!
So the Pennsylvania case was rejected and not put on the “docket”? Or was it on the docket and then rejected?
They just refused to hold up the certification. They are operating as though it is not going to have a negetive impact no matter which way the decision goes, which is correct.
This is too much legalese. I'm a science teacher. I'll be glad to explain how angiosperms and gymnosperms differ.
Thanks for your explanation.
To make sure I'm clear: the thing that was denied is a request for an injunction to stop the certification process. That's all. The certification process, as we know, is largely irrelevant to the overall case.
Am I right?