Help

In the last paragraph we are given the exmaple of a game in which participants compete to steal the item of highest value from a shop. We are told that a CLS scholar might object that legal cases are unlike games, in that one cannot merely apply the rules without appealing to other considerations like purpose, policy and value. Meyerson, however responds by stating that these considerations may not be separate from the rules of the game. So, Meyerson argues that the considerations the CLS scholars say are separate from the rules, i.e. the legal process, may not actually be separate and instead may be a part of the legal process. Thus, this last statement shows that Meyerson believes that the question of whether such considerations are separate from or integral to the legal process is up for debate, since the last sentence says that Meyerson thinks such considerations "MAY BE VIEWED AS PART OF, NOT SEPRARATE FROM, THE RULES OF THE GAME," i.e. the could be separate, but they may not be. Hope that clears things up! Please let us know if you have any other questions.

Many thanks!!^^