Term 1 - Judicial Thread

Donovan Zoi said:
Honorable Chief Justice Cyc and Members of the Court,

First of all, would the court prefer that drafters of proposed polls include in their JR request the actual text of the final item being proposed? This would keep the court from having to sift through an entire thread for the actual document in question, as there are typically several incarnations of a bill before the final draft.
Click to expand...

Personally, as I have posted all of the requests thus far, in both the listings in post #3 and here in the normal posts of the Judicial Thread, I have found it easier if the person submitting the request simply posts a link to the proposed legislation (post number represented by text). When I have to transfer the text, it usually involves editing line lengths or reformatting of some sort. Believe me, there is a LOT of cutting and pasting in this position as CJ. :) I would much rather copy the shortcut to the link, than all the other work involved with perfect text. By the way, if anyone should spot an error withany of the links or text, please pull my nose away from the grindstone so I can fix it. :)

Donovan_Zoi said:
And secondly, to save the valuable time of our judges, would the court prefer that JR requests on said laws be held until the final draft is ready for submission? And if so, should the 24 hour period of final discussion that was practiced duning our initial ratification process continue to be granted prior to an amendment's submission to the court? This would ensure that the court does not mistakenly, yet through no fault of its own, submit a work-in-progress to the House. It would also give the citizens 24 hours of final discussion that they enjoyed during the ratification of most of our Constitution.
Click to expand...

In the text that you quoted of the Judicial Procedure (post #2 of this thread), 7.B.1, Any member of the House may present proposed legislation to the Judiciary after following procedure for proposing amendments and laws., it states that any citizen may request a JR for their proposed legislation (which by then, should be in the form of a Proposed Poll). A Proposed Poll should only be drawn up at the conclusion of discussion on the matter, as a form to present to the Judiciary. I have outlined these procedures for Comnenus in Post #23. As there can be a time lag of undetermined length between the time a Proposed Poll (Legislation) is submitted to the Court and the time a JR is completed, this Court see no problem with requesting a JR for said document immediately after posting the Proposed Poll at the bottom of the discussion thread. If the 24 hour period expires before the JR is completed, the Poll may or may not be posted in the Poll sub-forum depending on the author. If the JR approves the Proposed Poll, then everything is fine and we merely have to wait for the results of the poll. If the Proposed Poll does not pass Judicial Review, then if the Poll was posted, it will need to be closed. If the Poll was not posted, then it needs to be reworked and resubmitted.This is a Judgemnet call by the author of the Proposed Poll. So in answer to your multi-pronged question, 1. Yes, before requesting a JR on a Proposed Poll, the Proposed Poll must be posted at the bottom of the discussion thread, and 2. The 24 hour period starts as soon as the Proposed Poll is posted at the bottom of the discussion thread. Keep in mind if any changes are made to the Proposed Poll, the 24 hour period starts again.
 
DG5JR1

Considered:

Therefore, in reference to Article D of our Constitution:

With no laws in place to state the contrary, can an implied Chain of Command be granted by Article D, or is the President free to pass the game on to whomever he wishes?

When I opened discussion on this JR, I stated that I would wait on the other Justices before posting. But Public Defender KCCrusader is rendered the only Opinion thus far, Judge Advocate Immortal must be delayed. Therefore I will now post my Opinion.

As also stated in the discussion opening "In the begining narrative is the sentance, "It is headed by the President who shall be the primary Designated Player." The Term primary Designated Player indicates that there is more than one Designated Player allowed. It does not stated how a secondary DP is authorized, but as our President is our Supreme Leader and in primary control of the DP position, it would seem the President's judgement on this matter would suffice." I still agree with this. A Chain of Command may be implied in Article D, but not granted. Therefore no restrictions covering who the President choses to replace him are Legislated here. What is stated is that the President is the primary controller of the Designated Play position. This not only means that the President may chose who replaces him as a temporary DP, it also means that no one, and I repeat for effect, no one may play the save just because the President didn't show up at the chat.

DG5JR1 Chief Justice Opinion ~ No Chain of Command is granted through Article D and the President has the authority to assign DP duties to whomever he wishes.
 
DG5JR1
Requested By donovan Zoi

Review: With no laws in place to state the contrary, can an implied Chain of Command be granted by Article D, or is the President free to pass the game on to whomever he wishes?

The implication in this article is that the President is a Primary Designated player, however this also implies there is a secondary player, a tertiary player, a quaternary player. However, there lacks any definition of CoC. Given the Presidents status as chief of the executive, it is my opinion that he be allowed to determine chain of command at his choice, and change it of his own freewill at any time.

Final Opinion There is no defined Chain Of Command, therefore it falls to the President to determine a Chain of Command should he see fit. If he does not, it is his decision who the Designated Player shall be in his absence.

Judge Advocate 08/02/04
 
DG5JR2:
Requested by: Commenus

Legislation Pending:

Code: 
Article H.
              No person shall hold multiple positions of leadership (President,
              Vice-President, Department Leader, Judiciary, Provincial Governor,
              Deputy) simultaneously, nor shall have more than one accepted 
              nomination at the commencement of the general election.

Final Opinion: The article as is, is acceptable and can be submitted for citizen ratification.
 
DG5JR4
Requested by:Commenus

Legislation Pending:

Code: 
][CODE]Article E. Legislative Branch

The Legislative Branch will be formed of one House of the People and an Advisory Council. 
          1.The House of the People will be formed of the entirety of the
          citizenry and is responsible for the drafting of new Laws and
          Amendments to the Constitution.
		a.The House will present all proposed Articles, Amendments
                             and Laws to the Judicial Branch for review.
          2.The Advisory Council will be formed of the Provincial Governors.
          They will advise the citizens of the state of their individual
          provinces, any concerns there may be for said provinces,
          and enumerate any goals they envision for their provinces. 
          	             a.Each Governor shall determine any policies and 
                            procedures needed to carry out their duties.
	   	b.Governors are responsible for the care, management,
                            use of the cities, and use of lands of a province through 
                            the setting of build queues, allocation of laborers on tiles,
                            population rushes and drafting of citizen soldiers.

Final Opinion: Is it my opinion that the legislation is constiutional, however I would like to clarify now that in my opinion governors are always at the whim of the executive ALL members of it, and lack any executive powers.

The Legislation is approved, ratification should move forward.

Judge Advocate 08/02/04
 
DG5JR3:
Requested By: Commenus:

Legislation Pending:

Code: 
   Article O
             The area contained within the national boundaries of Japanatica 
             shall be divided into areas called provinces, each of which 
             is under the control of a Governor as stated in Article E. of the
             Constitution. These boundries must be defined and approved by 
             the House well ahead of expansion, and may extend beyond the 
             cultural boundaries. City locations shall be determined by the 
             Will of the People.


Final Opinion: This legislation is approved, however I would once again like to reiterate that governors are to submit to all members of the executive at any time in regard to provinces.

Judge Advocate 08/02/04
 
DG5JR2

Comnenus has requested a JR on his Proposed Poll for an Amendment to Article H of the Constitution. This propsed poll has been changed many times, including a couple since the request was made, I believe. Therefore I would like to state at this time that the Proposed Legislation in question for this JR is post #42 of the discussion thread for this matter.

As Chief Justice, I find that this Legislation in no way conflicts with any existing Law.
 
DG5JR3

Comnenus has requested a JR on his Proposed Poll for an Amendment to Article O of the Constitution. Although I have not mentioned this before, the requests are being made for Legislation, not polls. In the future, I request that actual mock polls be posted at the bottom of the discussion thread. This will allow this Court to examine the wording of the poll and verify that what is posted as the actual poll in the poll sub-forum matches what is submitted to this Court as a request for Judicial Review.

In review of the Legislation submitted by Comnenus, post #19 of the discussion thread, I, as Chief Justice, find that this Legislation in no way conflicts with existing Law.
 
Cyc said:
In the future, I request that actual mock polls be posted at the bottom of the discussion thread. This will allow this Court to examine the wording of the poll and verify that what is posted as the actual poll in the poll sub-forum matches what is submitted to this Court as a request for Judicial Review.
Click to expand...

I am not certain how that works. Do we just post a poll in the midst of the discussion thread or go to the poll section and post a poll, or what? :confused: Does the poll have any validity? Sorry, but you completely lost me here.
 
I'm sorry I guess I wasn't very clear here. Maybe I'm thinking everyone knows this already. :rolleyes: My mistake.

When you post a "Proposed Poll" at the bottom of your discussion thread, what you are posting is the "narrative" of the poll. This narrative would not only give the details of the poll (why the poll was created, list the options with a brief description of each to follow, how long the poll should run, etc.), but also have any information generally expected in an important poll. By this I mean a line that says "Dicussion can be found at this link (even though in your mock poll you would link to the page your in. Type type in the sentance. In the poll, you would link back to the thread.) and more...

What you have been requesting JRs on is only the legislation to be voted on. If we approve the Legislation and then you post a ridiculous, biased, or unverifiable poll, then we have wasted our time and can be consider liable for approving your "Proposed Poll". If you make your "Proposed Poll" look just like the narrative (Initial wording for the poll), then our JR can approve exactly what you will post as a poll.

Does this help?
EDIT: Post 5800
 
To help with the "Proposed Poll" problem, I'm going to post one below, using the wording that DaveShack used for one of his actual poll, prior to this game starting. Up to in the title box, I would put "Proposed Poll for an Amendment to Articles A through C and the Preamble of the Constitution. Then below in the narrative box, I would put the following:

Ratification Poll: Constitution preamble and Articles A thru C

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is the ratification poll for the preamble to the constitution, and articles A thru C. A majority of votes cast in the affirmative will signify these articles are ratified. Amendments to these articles may be proposed and passed using a majority until such time as the constitution in its entirety has been ratified, at which time the rules regarding ratification of amendments (if any) take effect.

Please vote yes to ratify (accept) these articles as written, no to reject them, or abstain if you wish to record your indifference to this decision. A majority is defined as (YES > NO) AND (YES >= NO + ABSTAIN). For example, yes=15, no=14, abstain=1 -> the articles are ratified. yes=15, no=15 -> ratification fails.

This poll will remain open for 7 days, and the option to see all the votes is enabled to ensure that we can tell later whether people voting in the poll were actually intending to become citizens. If there is significant disagreement with the poll being open, I will ask the moderators to delete it and I'll repost it as closed.

The text to be ratified:

Code: 
We, the people of Fanatica, in order to create an atmosphere of 
friendship and cooperation, establish this Constitution of our 
beloved country. We uphold the beliefs that each citizen must 
have an equal voice in the government and ruling of our country, 
that government itself is a construct of and servant to the people,
that rules, regulations, and laws should be established to 
facilitate the active participation of the people and to make 
possible the dreams and desires of the citizens.

Article A.  All Civfanatics Forum users who register in the Citizen 
            Registry are citizens of our country. Citizens have the 
            right to assemble, the right to free movement, the right 
            to free speech, the right to a fair trial, the right to 
            representation, the right to seek to redress grievances 
            and the right to vote.

Article B.  Governing rules shall consist of these Articles of the 
            Constitution, such amendments that shall follow and lower
            forms of law that may be implemented. No rule shall be 
            valid that contradicts these Articles excepting an 
            amendment or lower form of law specifically tasked
            to do so.

Article C.  The government will consist of the Executive Branch, 
            Legislative Branch and Judicial Branch.


And that would be all that was needed on the page. In this example, the last part of the narrative about the poll being disagreed with would not be needed. The one thing he did forget was a link back to the discussion thread. I will also go back to your discussion thread and post another "Proposed Poll" so you can see what I mean.
 
I guess my misunderstanding is based on the words "mock poll". I don't see a poll, unless by that you mean vote yea or nay by stating so in the thread rather than in an actual poll.
 
I would like to take a moment to thank the Judiciary for their prompt consideration of the legal actions which have been initiated so far, and the professional way in which business has been conducted! Keep up the good work! :goodjob: [dance]
 
DaveShack said:
I would like to take a moment to thank the Judiciary for their prompt consideration of the legal actions which have been initiated so far, and the professional way in which business has been conducted! Keep up the good work! :goodjob: [dance]
Click to expand...

I would like to second that, whole-heartedly! :goodjob:
 
Comnenus said:
I guess my misunderstanding is based on the words "mock poll". I don't see a poll, unless by that you mean vote yea or nay by stating so in the thread rather than in an actual poll.
Click to expand...

OK, when I say "Mock Poll", I don't really mean you would "post a poll" at the bottom of your discussion thread. What you would post would just be a normal post that has the narrative of the actual poll you would post in the poll sub-forum. The first post in any poll is the narrative of that poll. In order to post any poll, you need to fill in the narrative portion of the poll. The narrative portion of the poll (the first post following the options to vote on), should have all the information needed to educate the reader/voter enough to make a resonably educated vote. That is why a link to the discussion thread needs to go in every poll (in case the reader/voter wants to check out the discussion).

So when I say "post a proposed poll in your discussion thread" I don't mean post a poll, I mean post the narrative for the poll that will included all the info I want to see. Are we on the same page here? You don't have people vote in a "proposed poll" in any way. You just post the information for the Judiciary to look at.
 
Ok. that is pretty much what I've been doing, although I can't guarentee I did it in every one of them. I will be more diligent in the future.
 
DG5JR3 Requested by: Comnenus
Regarding Proposed Amendment to Article O

Assumed:This text will replace all text in Article O of the constitution.

Although there is not currently an Article E, if the current unratified Article E was in place there would be no problem with this law. Since Article E has moved on to the ratification process, I have decided not to hold my opinion on this legislation.

Upon review of our current law, I can find no discrepancies, redundancies or contradictions between the proposed law and the existing law.

Opinion on DG5JR3: Proposed legislation is within the bounds of the law and should move to the ratification process.
 
Esteemed member KCCrusader:

My reason for not waiting as you did for the Article was that I approved of article E first, then went back to JR3 as to ensure one was approved after the other. Thus, both can be voted upon at the same time.
 
This Court has post Opinions on the first three Judicial Reviews. I shall post the Majority Opinion for these JRs in the Judicial Log probably sometime tonight. I will also be posting the Chief Justice's Opinion on DG5JR4, which will conclude review of that issue, and have its Majority Opinion posted in the Judicial Log.

I would like to thank the Justices for their work and the citizens for their involvement.
 
DG5JR4

Comnenus has requested a Judicial Review for his Proposed Poll concerning Article E of the Constitution.

In review of the legislation submitted by Comnenus, post #20 of the discussion thread, I as Chief Justice, find that this legislation in no way conflicts with existing law.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Lexicus
  • Locked
Gaza Genocide News Thread
Replies
2
Views
299
lymond
lymond
amadeus
The Boring Thread
2 3 4
Replies
70
Views
2K
Crezth
Crezth
BlueTemplar
[Culture] Aka ("Pygmy")
Replies
11
Views
579
Thunderbrd
Thunderbrd
kcd_swede
[BTS] News: BOTM 264 - Taylor Swift, Monarch - First Spoiler to 1 AD
Replies
14
Views
877
DynamicSpirit
DynamicSpirit
V
  • Sticky
TSG 244 After Actions Thread
Replies
15
Views
766
BuilderFTW
B
Top Bottom