> (kind of funny those legal arguments never came up BEFORE it could even be put up for a vote, again showing the level of confidence on display)
Actually, IMO, it shows one of the weaknesses of our legal system.
The courts can't rule on something that someone's talking about doing. They can only rule on actual legislation.
It would genuinely be great if there were a formal legal process for writing a bill, submitting it to some particular court (maybe the top state appeals court?) for review, and only after that review letting it be voted into law.
I think that's a bit of the purpose of the scientific service of the parliament (e.g. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wissenschaftliche_Dienste_des_..., not sure how this is called in other countries)
Also you can ask anyone you like about your legislative proposal, including the judges of a court.