January 2009 Fastrack is out..

[tderonne]

FWIW, my take on all of this is that it only reinforces the first principle that the protest-appeal process, difficult as it may be, is the only way we enforce the rules. They are the Judiciary to the ITAC/Board's Legislative branch.

Until the US Supreme Court makes a ruling on something, a law can be interpreted differently. Until the COA decides - ditto. If I based a business or legal action in WV on a state court ruling in Maine, I'd run the risk of falling afoul of the local law.

Now, internal inconsistencies by individuals is what we call in my office a "management issue" - not one of policy or procedure.

K

But you're back to square one when the new GCR comes out. The US Supreme Court analogy would only apply if they rewrote the Constitution every year.

Page III of the GCR:
"Effective January 1st, of each year, all editions of the SCCA General Competition Rules and all Court of Appeals rulings are superseded by the following SCCA General Competition Rules."

[Dave Gomberg]

But you're back to square one when the new GCR comes out. The US Supreme Court analogy would only apply if they rewrote the Constitution every year.

Page III of the GCR:
"Effective January 1st, of each year, all editions of the SCCA General Competition Rules and all Court of Appeals rulings are superseded by the following SCCA General Competition Rules."

While that is true on its face, in practice the CoA asks for CRB input on technical matters these days. Once their decision is made, the CRB looks at whether a change to the rules is necessary or desirable.

Dave

[Knestis]

But you're back to square one when the new GCR comes out. The US Supreme Court analogy would only apply if they rewrote the Constitution every year.

Page III of the GCR:
"Effective January 1st, of each year, all editions of the SCCA General Competition Rules and all Court of Appeals rulings are superseded by the following SCCA General Competition Rules."

...and I used to think that was absolutely awful but the more I noodle over it, the more I understand why that's the case. While at face value, two protests going to appeal might seem similar (say, about rear spoilers) but the details of each case may be quite different, supported by unique evidence. I don't necessarily think it's right [EDIT - that particular clause of the GCR] how it is but I can understand the rationale.

K