Thank you very much for the question.
The Department of Justice wrote the legal opinion. They write the legal opinions for government. The paragraph 2(c) question is significant. The interpretation of paragraph 2(c) and the Emergencies Act is that the national security description and the parameters are assigned the meaning per paragraph 2(c) of the CSIS Act, as opposed to derived directly from.
That means that there's not one person in this country who determines that something is a national security threat. We do not believe that the drafters of the Emergencies Act intended for the CSIS director to be the sole arbiter of national security threats to this country. It means, as an example, that there could be a policing situation—lawlessness on the streets, the police are overwhelmed and they cannot respond—but if there wasn't a very narrow paragraph 2(c) threat, then the Emergencies Act couldn't be applied.
We do not believe that this was the intention of the drafters.