On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 2:32 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion <agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > Can someone point me to the CFJ that says "authorized to" conditions are > triggered by a CAN, but not a SHALL? (specifically that look at the term > "authorize", I'm just curious how much that highly-used but undefined in > the rules word has been adjudicated).
This one is pretty close, in that it asks whether "X SHALL do Y" resulted in the rules "authorizing" Y. It's not quite on point, though: as the judge of that case I simply assumed that "authorized" meant "CAN", and focused instead on the question of whether that particular SHALL implied a CAN. https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3736
