from a claim i don't know i mean they seem to concede that there's probably appreciate candor it doesn't seem very difficult to see when there's actually an opportunity to write relief here but that doesn't mean that it's moot right now because i mean as i read the case life doesn't become moot at least until it can no longer the dates passed for it to get on the ballot so what do we do in the mean i mean say that i mean i'm not sure i agree with you i guess the question is because move this is an article three issue and so when could it become the it's august th i think that the signatures have to be submitted  not submitted by that deadline would that make it move or is that we still say there's still some possibility i don't know that they could figure out a way to get onto the ballot by september th and that's the that's the big issues is the september th deadline well but that's my question is could it become moot before that if they don't submit so this is different in oregon case it's submitted that complied with what the district court said  moot because signatures hadn't been submitted they don't even meet the threshold i don't remember they don't even need the threshold on august th with the case become moot at that yes i believe i believe so i mean well d if they did more fundamentally and if everyone agree it seems like again what i want to hear from with them i don't know but if both parties do agree that this case at least in your own it seems to indicate that sir replied as well the question is why not mutually dismiss appeal and act before the district court the can you answer to that question all i can say is that i think we're all having to make really difficult choice we're having to make choices and our kids back to elementary school you know two weeks from now so we don't know what's going to be i don't think anyone would suggest you know what's going to happen in juneau you know two thousand and twenty two so what do we do with that do we say well it's possible so therefore if you know we might come back again or do we say this is just so speculative no one knows it's just start over and then see what happens and if it turns out to be a  just came up because one of the things they complained about in the case and is that they got the runaround from the original from the state of idaho that you know they sort of said hey can you do anything for as the governor said no we can't but you know maybe the secretary of state can in the secretary of state said no we can't do anything the journey jet or the governor can do it well that is problematic i mean if that keeps going on to get relief is your position that it's only the legislature that there's no executive action that well no no i think you need to look at the record here they've never to communicate directly to either governor or the secretary of state staffer from the governor i mean is that i don't know its position that there are no exceptions at all that are d available on an executive basis and it only has to come from the legislature well  i think when you look at everything that was done and you well i'm just i didn't look at midway i don't know how relevant it is to where we're at today  but if we're all starting to focus on two thousand and twenty two is trying to figure out a way that this can go a little more smoothly and if we claim i don't know it's going to come i mean it is what it is if they're going to get their men around they're going to file another lawsuit or whatever but i don't hear an answer from you about whether executive action is even possible in two thousand and twenty two if if something happens so when you look at  possible to make that kind of an executive order here between not between now and then start and oh my god i guess there's two reasons for my my question on that i mean why doesn't that show that that was not narrowly tailored or that out was that there was a compelling state interest that there that they could attorney and well i don't think we're asking you speculate we're trying to get an understanding of whether the representations that were made that the governor has made or that's the attorney general's position because if that's the position then i think it you know better but one thing we can do is if something if we're going to go forward to two thousand and twenty two we can start to have a little bit more of an organized process and it would be good to start get some understand in as i think what's happening here is you've got district courts trying to decide these cases on the fly with you know they're doing the best that they can and to be better to get some of this understanding out of the way and if the governor's position is to be yes no executive authority and then it's to be understood the you i mean when i ask you to speculate on what the governor would do but you are authorized to speak on behalf of the state of idaho on those statutes to be interpreted and do you think the governor has it the worry issue well let me ask it this way was there ever an attorney general opinion that the governor was relying on when he said he didn't have authority to  correct the minimum percentage is the constitutional requirement and i don't think we claim i know who is challenging that so i guess you know this was also we were going to get election deadlines and ukraine by executive order that only mail in vote would take place in the primaries and not only that he also delegated to the secretary of state the authority to suspend any other statutes that the secretary deems necessary so i'm just trying to figure out again this was going to the merits it seems also relevant here why does the governor think there's as judge nelson stated i mean we're trying i think people are trying to do this on the fly and they're trying to make the best decisions turn the pand paul and think through these issues in the attorney general's office a little more carefully because i don't think we're getting an answer to whether the governor has authority and that seems to be a pretty fundamental question maybe that has been decided on the fly electronic signature process that the state uses to register voters so i'm trying to figure out at least there was some reference to that in the record some trying to figure out why that jesus hancock he talked about the differences and in it he basically says when he did this electronic kind of registration data last spring they used for  social security driver's license number of the also still use a web signature so that is what the state processed and that's out of the county  individuals to risk getting a disease like accoutred nineteen or risk their lives or in person signatures when there are other reasonable term incentives and in my view at least it we'll hear now from our reclaim our whole morning i'm deborah st in behalf of reclaim idaho and reclaim idaho was seeking the opportunity to get its educational funding initiative on the ballot as you see from our briefing this is an all volunteer force kind of extraordinary in and of itself they showed excellent diligence to accomplish this  idaho his some of the most rigid and strict initiative requirements in the country and they were well on their way to putting it on the ballot i think we had the   weeping scope of a supreme court stay that isn't just until there's a determination by this court on the merits but that would allow the state to then file a petition f search and go all the way through that timeframe and then even beyond that till the supreme court made a determination of the petition for certain there really there is no we don't see any realistic path forward that indicate that you know it will be why not mutually dismiss this appeal and the action before the district were well if this is mr mr barry appeal is that he's filed on behalf of the twenty general's office and they have made no no indication that they were willing to dismiss the appeal certainly if it were if it were my appeal i would dismiss it but i'm you know here well i think i think what we just heard from mr barry and not to turn this into a mediation conference but what we just heard was and i think it's a fair point that part of that depends on what would happen in th perhaps i don't know the mood out there to agree that the district court decision has no presidential value is moved if you were able to wrap that all up would you be willing to go along with that but i may both agree that we have to the determination and look at all the exceptions and here the exception that we've been talking about this the other the you and so can i get your thoughts on that well is the court has discussed already at length you know the standard there is a reasonable expectation of both those standards and i can't say that we have  a reasonable expectation that it would not you know be capable of repetition or would have a review so if reclaim were to bring a similar initiative that would occur in two and twenty two election they would have eighteen months to begin the process over so i i don't feel that we could say that we have reasonable expectations of specific and whether this is going to a recurring again in two years and i can't i can't say well if we were to just dismiss everything you get we've got the voluntary dismissal which might wrap everything up but if that doesn't happen and we were just to dismiss the appeal as to the injunction as moved do you see value in pursuing that declaratory judgment in district court or is your position look we're we're in addition to the injunction for a declaratory judgment but our declaratory judgment was based on an ad supplying challenge again and you know under these facts and circumstances  which i don't so i went again to have to have more discussions with my client to majority to make me representation well i think the risk is you point i think where you're headed with this is that when it's a say you know you could you could start at a very high level of generality but we don't know what the situation to the one you may be able to you may be able to meet it if you start in here i've not trained it you know suggest reason that they started when they did last fall was lack of organization and diligence it's if there's a very different dynamic in this is in the in the record in our declarations i for volunteers and so people it is as individuals and humans that and their they see the value in what they're doing and they are is a deadline it's it's quite clear that that works far more than just stretching it out over a long period of time so but i do think that with a declaratory judgment again i get back to the fact i don't i prefer i wish i didn't have to agree with you on this point but in as i read as i read the you know that supreme court precedent on this there's a huge hesitancy to get involved and if you know have the federal courts get involved in state court processes and where i don't know has such a strong history of the ballot initiative process i just wonder whether the st amendment and i don't know what would have changed that analysis i don't know if you have any thoughts on that it's not really particularly relevant but i'm just sort of you know not what i would consider the but it's some sometime in advance what was the date that district court issue order i believe they issued the order on the  court took it up immediately so it was a very a very expedited process you know i part of with the they state's emergency education to the supreme court you know we certainly were aware of the other cases though that are found in justice sotomayor is footnote in her just spent and certainly hopeful that reclaim because it was not a matter of voting and it wasn't on the attention and distinction that this was a this is a ballot initiative it's only about the opportunity to collect the signatures to complete collecting them and the election if they have a point was you know a four or five months away from court for my client didn't didn't recognize that distinction so that's all i wanted to say but