Term 2- Election for Chief Justice

[RoboPig]

Pick a Chief Justice from the following people:
Black Hole
Donsig
Vander

 

[Strider]

There was once a time, I would have shot myself for saying this.

I voted for Donsig, he has plenty of experience in how the PI (or whatever they're called now) system works.

 

[Chieftess]

I vote for Donsig to preside over his own PI.

 

[ravensfire]

To ensure this doesn't get missed, I'll post my questions here.

Questions -

1) Can you give a general statement about the procedures you plan to use?

2) Let's say a citizen poll over a decision quickly entered into heated discussion about procedural matters. The Censor has not weighed into the debate yet. A citizen involved requests a JR for the court to "determine the type and validity" of the poll. what would you do?

3) Where does the concept of "fun" enter into your rulings?

-- Ravensfire

 

[Vander]

1.) I plan to follow the so called "Western" method for coming to a decision that us North Americans and Europeans are used to. Specifically, I will hear arguments for and against the point of contention. Then, confer with the other judiciary members if necessary, otherwise, continue on with looking over the Code of Laws and the Constitution one last time before announcing my decision.
Above all, I will act as the Supreme Court of the United States does: Rule on disputes as they pertain to our Laws and rules we have set out. It is not my position to create any sort of new guideline. Rather, to decide the constitutionality of something that comes before me.

2.) Again, I will look over our Constitution and Code of Laws. In this situation, I will do as follows:
- The constitution states that any citizen has the "Right to Assemble, Vote, Free Speech, and Representation." (Article B, section 2, subsections a,b,d,h) Thus, any citizen can create a poll, in so much as it acts as in regard with the prestated rights.
- Article C, section 1, subsection 2 states in what ways the will of the people will be manifested through our elected officals. Of these methods, various polls are included. Now, depending on the office of the citizen who created it and the scope of the poll, the level to which it will apply will be determined (Be it simple opinion, referendum, or initiative). This would be the only role of the Judicary in this scenario: To confirm to which catagory the poll in question belongs.

3.) 'Fun' is something that is tricky to have in judical affairs. Yes, we are human and thus enjoy having fun. However, the nature of the judicary is that of a inherently neutral body. It is necessary for the judiciary to be as independant as possible from any one side. In other words: No fun is to be had with the business of the judicary. Now what happens behind the closed doors is another matter .

 

[Black_Hole]

To ensure this doesn't get missed, I'll post my questions here.

Questions -

1) Can you give a general statement about the procedures you plan to use?

2) Let's say a citizen poll over a decision quickly entered into heated discussion about procedural matters. The Censor has not weighed into the debate yet. A citizen involved requests a JR for the court to "determine the type and validity" of the poll. what would you do?

3) Where does the concept of "fun" enter into your rulings?

-- Ravensfire

1. The current procedures look fine to me, so unless the other justices have ideas I won't change them

2. The constitution defines types of polls and the citizens rights to post polls, while the CoL requires the Censor to verify the polls, well the Constituion always trumpts the CoL, so in my opinion that poll would be valid, but it may also depend on specifics.

3. Chances are people won't like my answer but here goes: I don't take fun into account in my ruling, I rule on the law... If people want something to be funner go and get the CoL/Constitution amended not use the Judiciary to do it.

 

[Black_Hole]

Anymore questions? I should have some time to answer them inbetween making fake accounts j/k

 

[donsig]

To ensure this doesn't get missed, I'll post my questions here.

Questions -

1) Can you give a general statement about the procedures you plan to use?

2) Let's say a citizen poll over a decision quickly entered into heated discussion about procedural matters. The Censor has not weighed into the debate yet. A citizen involved requests a JR for the court to "determine the type and validity" of the poll. what would you do?

3) Where does the concept of "fun" enter into your rulings?

-- Ravensfire

1) The term one procedures are fine. I'd use them.

2) If the poll was unclear as to its type (i.e., if I thought the request had merit) I'd ask the judiciary to review it.

3) Making rulings is fun. That's why I try to get elected to the judiciary. Are you asking about other people's fun?

 

[Swissempire]

As official Censor of the Citiziens Assembly, I declare this poll valid and Declare Donsig the Term 2 Chief Justice

 

[Vander]

Bah, 3 votes shy! Some idiot must have bungled the election fraud campaign . But seriously, congrats.

 

[Black_Hole]

Bah, 3 votes shy! Some idiot must have bungled the election fraud campaign . But seriously, congrats.

I know, I mean I was only 17 off

Congrats Donsig!