Two examples demonstrate this. First, TE Andrew Barnes attempted to object to a decision made by the SJC, but his objection was ruled out of order on the basis that he was not a member of the SJC. He was then told that only members of the SJC can object to SJC rulings. TE Barnes then responded that he is a member of the General Assembly and pointed out that the SJC is a commission of the General Assembly, and as such he should have standing to be able to object. He was again told that this is not the case by the Stated Clerk, Roy Taylor.
A second example of this is that Overtures 19 and 23 were ruled out of order by the moderator, and evidently for good reason: The PCA has no way for what is supposed to be the final court (the General Assembly) to question the ruling of the SJC. These overtures were doomed from the beginning, although they do draw attention to the presence of major dissatisfaction within the PCA with how the case was handled. Many would like for this case to be retried for a number of reasons, not least of which is the fact that the prosecutor, by his own admission, was persuaded of the truth claims of the Roman Catholic Church while trying this case. Unfortunately, this meant that the merits of the Leithart case were not even heard by the General Assembly.
The actions of the 41st GA did, however, resulted in some misplaced celebrations:
Leithart and Meyers exonerated by the #pcaga Alleluia!Of course, this is nothing close to an exoneration in any meaningful sense. This would be a curious form of exoneration; to have the case never brought before the GA on a few technicalities is hardly what most people would consider exonerated. The General Assembly, to our imperfect memories, never even mentioned the name "Leithart." Nobody at GA heard the complaints or even had an opportunity to publicly discuss the merits of the case. And as it stands, it looks like that may never happen.
— Timothy LeCroy (@PresbyterTim) June 20, 2013
Josh Walker and Adam Parker