1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Juducial Review Discussion Thread- JR10

Discussion in 'Civ4 - Demo Game: Citizens' started by Swissempire, Mar 27, 2006.

  1. Swissempire

    Swissempire Poet Jester

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Messages:
    5,018
    Location:
    Hamilton College/Florida
    Judicial Review 10 is A judicial review which was requested by Swiss Empire asking whether confirmation polls need to be 48 hours long, and whether the confirmation poll of Curufinwe as Chief Justice, posted by Donsig, was legal.
    The law cited is

     
  2. Swissempire

    Swissempire Poet Jester

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Messages:
    5,018
    Location:
    Hamilton College/Florida
    Since i was not given a chance to argue this before, here we go.

    With this arguement i hope to also persuade my doubters that i am capable of be a justice.

    Point A. In the constitution, it specifically states
     
  3. DaveShack

    DaveShack Inventor Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Messages:
    13,108
    Location:
    Arizona, USA (it's a dry heat)
    Hmm,

    Isn't there a forum rule about opening self-serving threads? :rolleyes:

    Anyway, here's a rebuttal.

    The law as written says:
    This poll should last for 48 hours.

    Here are two different ways this could be interpreted. Both are valid.
    1. This poll should be at least 48 hours.
    2. This poll must last for exactly 48 hours.
    Taking interpretation #1, what is the purpose of a poll which must be open at least a certain amount of time? Clearly this is to allow people a chance to see the poll and vote. Does a poll open for a longer time period help, or does it hurt? Clearly it helps, as even more people will have that opportunity to vote.

    Taking interpretation #2, what is the purpose of having a poll open an exact amount of time? To provide a definite ending time for the poll, because such a time is required for reasons external to the poll itself. Election polls fit this purpose, because the term starts at a definite time. Confirmation polls do not fit this purpose, because the appointment is assumed confirmed unless the vote is for non-confirmation. There is nothing preventing an appointed official from taking office immediately, regardless of a confirmation poll's result.

    Given that the purpose of interpretation #1 is enhanced by allowing longer time periods, and the purpose of interpretation #2 is not relevant to this kind of poll, it is clear that a reasonable citizen might use interpretation #1, in good faith, believing it to be the correct way of looking at this law.

    Now, we have the precedent that the judiciary cannot read new meaning into the law, so the simple definition of "should" has to be used, as in "it would be preferred if, but not necessary that". Shall or must are used when an absolute requirement exists.

    If the citizens want the poll to be exactly 48 hours in all interpretations, they must (almost said should :lol:) pass an amendment to say must, or add exactly.

    Second question: was the poll legal?

    The poll was legal, for the same reason that the selection of Triumvirate 6.0 as the CoL was legal, as ruled by the Term 1 judiciary. The law, at the time that the poll opened was posted by a citizen, private, and open at least 48 hours, one of the potentially valid interpretations of the law. The people voted in good faith in that poll, believing it to be valid. Even if it were now ruled that should be in the law really means must be exactly this would still not invalidate the poll, nor its result. A ruling by the judiciary, on a subject which does not apply any longer, cannot retroactively change the result. For example, if it were ruled now that Boaring Wallow was not settled according to the CoL in force at that time, we would not set the clock back to 4000BC. At most, the law would now be interpreted differently, to apply to future decisions.
     

Share This Page