Judicial Discussion JR1 CoL Ratification Poll legality

[trundle]

Another point I though about. If the CoL is struck down, does that not strike down all elections that happened? Let's assume that you rule that there was fraud in the original Tri vs. Flex pole, and that trickles down and nulifies the CoL vote. Some say that the CoL votes were based on fraudulant information. Should it not also trickle down and nulify all election results? Those results were based on votes with the same information. The problem is that if the results of elections are overturned, this court has no right to rule on the validity of the CoL. I'm not sure whose side I helped more, but I thought that was an important point to think about when deciding this case.

No, if the CoL were overturned, the Constitution would still be valid. And the elections for the Judiciary were valid under the Constitution (see Articles D and F).

 

[DaveShack]

I think this is veering off topic quickly and should be moved to a couple of threads:

1) A thread under the judiciary to deal with a trial (to be created only if one should occur)
2) A more open thread about clarifying whether or not a citizen may choose someone other than the Public Defender to advocate on their behalf or possibly amending the CoL or Constitution to make this allowance

Please note, Ravensfire, that point 2 by no means suggests that I think you may be unable to perform your job. Rather, it is more about a general philosophy I hold that people should be allowed to choose their own counsel.

These are easy points to cover.

If you're referring to a complaint against Alphawolf, it won't be necessary to hold a trial, since the situation was already handled by the mods. I think we have a mod tagged statement to that effect somewhere...

On the ability of a citizen to choose someone other than the Public Defender, that is already defined in the law.

Con. F.4.b says:

• The Public Defender will act as council to an accused citizen, if the accused citizen wishes.

It doesn't get any clearer than this.

 

[Blkbird]

No, if the CoL were overturned, the Constitution would still be valid. And the elections for the Judiciary were valid under the Constitution (see Articles D and F).

Exactly. I triple-checked that before I filed this JR.

 

[GeorgeOP]

Ok, so the Judiciary would stand, but the other elections would be nulified, correct? Or am I still not seeing the whole picture?

Also, (I'm sorry, but being new I'm not sure how normal Judicial process works, so I'll just come out and ask) do you know when the courts will reach a decision? When does the court rule on anything? Once two justices agree, or when all three have agreed that they've heard enough?

 

[ravensfire]

GeorgeOP - see my response in the Judicial thread.

-- Ravensfire, Public Defender

 

[Black_Hole]

Two More Arguments against its ratifacation:
1. If we follow the amendment proccess in the CoL, the CoL couldn't have been ratified, 48 hours between the mock poll and poll is required only 21 hours occurred, but does the ratifacation have to follow its own amendment proccess?

2. Constitution:

No decision shall require more support than an amendment to the Constitution.

According to Blkbird himself, the Code of Laws is harder to amend than the constitution, but is this allowed? Are ratifacation polls counted as decisions? If so that article is void, but if that article is void we can't change the CoL, this could put us in a pickle

 

[GeorgeOP]

Maybe the Judicary could ok the CoL, but then someome could bring up a second JR that challenges the amendment policy.

 

[trundle]

Two More Arguments against its ratifacation:
1. If we follow the amendment proccess in the CoL, the CoL couldn't have been ratified, 48 hours between the mock poll and poll is required only 21 hours occurred, but does the ratifacation have to follow its own amendment proccess?

2. Constitution:
According to Blkbird himself, the Code of Laws is harder to amend than the constitution, but is this allowed? Are ratifacation polls counted as decisions? If so that article is void, but if that article is void we can't change the CoL, this could put us in a pickle

I don't think it would make any amendments impossible to pass -- I think it would just make them fall under the same structure as any decision within the Constitution (referendums, initiatives, etc.).

 

[Blkbird]

Two More Arguments against its ratifacation:

They rather questions than arguments, aren't they?

1. If we follow the amendment proccess in the CoL, the CoL couldn't have been ratified, 48 hours between the mock poll and poll is required only 21 hours occurred, but does the ratifacation have to follow its own amendment proccess?

No, I've answered it in detail.

2. Constitution:
According to Blkbird himself, the Code of Laws is harder to amend than the constitution, but is this allowed? Are ratifacation polls counted as decisions? If so that article is void, but if that article is void we can't change the CoL, this could put us in a pickle

"Harder" in this context means that the process is more lengthy and complicated, not that it requires more support. Of course the ratification is a decision, and it requires less support (50% vs. 60%) than a Constitution amendment. A CoL amendment, which the rafication is not, would also require no more, but the same amount of support (60%) as a Constitution amendment.

 

[Blkbird]

For those who doesn't know, the honorable Public Defender ravensfire has posted his official ruling on this JR:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=3560510#post3560510

 

[trundle]

For those who doesn't know, the honorable Public Defender ravensfire has posted his official ruling on this JR:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=3560510#post3560510

Update: All three justices have posted their rulings, and the ratification has been upheld.

I wonder if anyone knew when they were nominating/campaigning that their first case would carry such weight with it... =)

 

[ravensfire]

I wonder if anyone knew when they were nominating/campaigning that their first case would carry such weight with it... =)

The first term tends to be the busiest. The first term with a brand new ruleset has the potential to be extremely busy.

-- Ravensfire