I think it would be an important intervention to have at this stage. Because throughout this week we've heard so many times “Bedford said this” and “Bedford said that”, I think it would be very useful to ask the Supreme Court whether or not this new legislation passes constitutional muster.
But again, one of the many problems we have with references is that they're often not based on a strong evidentiary record, are they? So there is a concern about passing this legislation and then, I suppose, waiting until the same harms that we identified in the pre-Bedford era emerge again. To me that's unconscionable.