Here’s how oral argument went in front of the 3d on that Carona/Suarez thing:
At Thursday’s hearing, the three appeals judges grilled Corona’s lawyer, William Petros, who could not get a word in edgewise before the sharp questions began.
“Is there any basis whatsoever” for withholding the results? Judge Alan Schwartz asked.
“How is [Corona] possibly harmed if the votes are released?” added Judge Frank Shepherd. “The public would have knowledge that could later be disavowed,” Petros responded. “So what?” Shepherd replied. Later, he added: “Does your client not have confidence in the electorate of this county?”
“Yes,” Petros answered.
And poor Judge Thomas, I don’t think the 3d liked his injunction very much:
The injunctive order under review is totally deficient in form….and entirely unsupported by substantive law.
Hmm, so the order is not just deficient, it’s “totally deficient.”
And it’s not just unsupported, it’s “entirely unsupported.”
Wonder which judge on the panel writes like that?