I don't disagree. I'm trying to understand where "spirit of justice" comes into play in the creation of a new law to prevent presidential abuses.

I don't think off the top of my head that Gonzales' situation were directly cited as abuses that were in violation of the Civil Rights Act. Am I wrong?

The so-called voter fraud investigations by the DoJ/US Attorneys of minority organizations in states with close elections (with /without WH involvment?) and, as a result, the Judiciary Committee investigations of voter caging by the RNC (with/without WH involvement?) are directly related to violations of the Voting Rights Act, which is a component of the Civil Rights Act.

Was there WH involvment in trying to influence elections by suppressing minority voters through bogus voter fraud complaints and voter caging? We still dont know. There is compelling circumstantial evidence, which is why we need the sworn testimony of WH senior staff who may have been involved.

Thanks, yes, agree those are important to investigate. I see that as a broad law, and don't see any "spirit of justice" as defined by Willravel.

I honestly dont know what represents the "spirit of justice" more than protecting voter rights from undue and/or illegal attempts at political influence from the DoJ and the RNC/WH

I don't understand what "spirit of justice" means.

I understand nothing is more important than protecting voter rights, but I don't see the words "spirit of justice" ever used in any context.

So since you are now using it, please explain what you mean as "spirit of justice"

nvm... i see that you're using the more proper definition of justice rather than as "punishment" since that is the more colloquial understanding of justice.

just catching up here--is the conventional split between "the letter" and "the spirit" of the law what is at issue here? or is it the term "justice" that's causing this static? the example of the investigation/non-investigation(s) dc cited above could work as a convenient example to demonstrate whatever the problem here is...

colloquial justice definition

5. the administering of deserved punishment or reward.

using the term that way jumps out of the line of argument in the thread, doesn't it: functionally, that's a way of saying "what i want to see happen" in shorthand....

It's okay to say, "Oh, I guess my description wasn't complete".
Oh how I wish your post ended here, because you asked for an example of legislation that was in "the spirit of justice", and I provided one.
FISA.

right that's exactly what I was misunderstanding with the defintion I was appying.

yes, had you read a couple posts up I understand the definition that you're applying. It's easy for me to state that I've misunderstood the conversation. I'm also happy to admit being wrong and to state unequivocally that I don't know something

I don't agree that the striking of coins is a just method of law, but you do and that's a good thing.