I was commenting specifically because I hate sloppy language and sloppy thought: there's just no meaningful sense in which "a particular kind of contract becoming non-enforceable" simplifies into "not being able to sign a particular kind of contract"; the latter implies some kind of intrusive intervention -- a noncompete gestapo slapping pen-from-hand should you try to sign such a contract -- which clearly wouldn't be the case under the proposal.
Exactly. The OP was suggesting that Mass. is taking an action to prevent him signing contracts. On the contrary, it is saying it will stay out of the way an refuse to take action to enforce a certain sort of contract.
Comments
I know what you're getting at.
I was commenting specifically because I hate sloppy language and sloppy thought: there's just no meaningful sense in which "a particular kind of contract becoming non-enforceable" simplifies into "not being able to sign a particular kind of contract"; the latter implies some kind of intrusive intervention -- a noncompete gestapo slapping pen-from-hand should you try to sign such a contract -- which clearly wouldn't be the case under the proposal.
Exactly. The OP was suggesting that Mass. is taking an action to prevent him signing contracts. On the contrary, it is saying it will stay out of the way an refuse to take action to enforce a certain sort of contract.