A State Supreme Court judge refused to rule on the State Senate's state of ridiculousness and instead urged (again!) the Senators to work out the matter. State Supreme Court Justice Thomas McNamara dismissed Smith vs. Espada (read the decision) and wrote, "A judicially imposed resolution would be an improvident intrusion into the inner workings of a coequal branch of government. The practical effect of having a court decide this issue would be that its decision, if only by perception, would have an influence on the internal workings of the Senate. To have a court do so would be improper... The failure of the Senate to resolve this issue in an appropriate manner will make them answerable to the electorate."



