Arbitrary detention, of course, is something that will have to shake out in any litigation challenge.
Manifest unconstitutionality is something that basically says it is on its face manifestly unconstitutional.
I would challenge any of the experts you've had before you to suggest that this legislation is manifestly unconstitutional. I would assume that the experts who have been here have testified that in their view, in a properly constructed challenge to the legislation, they are capable of coming up with credible arguments that would convince the court—and I'm sure they can feel certain about this—that the legislation is unconstitutional, or at least that some aspects of the legislation are unconstitutional.
I understand where they're coming from, and I don't think they would be dismissing it off the top of their heads as manifestly unconstitutional.
I'm sorry, I didn't mark down the second part of your—