Term 4 ~ Judiciary

[Nobody]

I find that striders ammendment does not conflict with the current laws. Although he does not state that it replaces the entire current COL, we all know thats what he meant. As i have said before, i give the benifit of the doubt to the proposed ammendment, I would rather let our Legislature decide our laws.

That said im sure in the final poll it will clearly state that the proposed ammendment will entirely replace the law.

 

[Strider]

I give permission for Black_Hole to override my JR request. Not exactly sure why I have to, but whatever. Let's just get this done and over with.

 

[donsig]

I suggest reconsideration of the ruling on the current JR, taking into consideration the provisions of Article F and the above referenced ruling on C4DG1JR5. I will allow 3 days to pass before actually filing the intended CC.

I will be taking no further official actions as Public Defender until either a) DaveShack files his complaint; or b) DaveShack rescinds his three day deadline. (BTW, if you're going to make deadlines like this - especially when the deadline covers a weekend - a holiday weekend for some, then you should make them four days.) To paraphrase our previous Chief Justice I will not allow the judiciary to be bullied. File your complaint or drop it.

At the risk of exhibiting malice aforesight I will explain the steps I am willing to take. First, I will gladly find DaveShack's CC has merit. Since it takes only one justice to do so for the case to proceed then it will proceed. There is no way I would recuse myself from this CC. As Public Defender I do not have to be impartial when defending the accused so I do not see how defending myself could possibly be a conflict of interest. Also, since it would be perfectly legal for me to defend myself as a citizen I see no reason why it should not be legal for me to do so as PD. This action may of course just add another layer of legal complexity to the current situation if my refusal to recuse myself causes controversy. Such a controversy could develope in different ways.

Yet another CC against me for refusing to recuse myself but that only sends us into a spiral of me not recusing myself from CCs where I'm the accused.

Another form it might take is a JR of current judicial prcedures since they say justices must recuse themsleves from CC's involving themselves. I'd challenge the constitutionality of the procedures. Then we're back to the question of do I have to recuse myself from such a JR. Well, I'd post a poll asking if the JR directly affected me. Of course I'd make it a private poll since it's about an individual and then most likely our Censor would invalidate the poll because it's private and we're deadlocked again.

Another direction it could take would be an attempt to recall/impeach me. This is currently against our laws but I've already gone on record as saying that is unconstitutional (in other words we should be allowed to recall justices). Any such attempt would result in a JR which would once again bring us to the question of do I recuse myself or not?

Anyone out there see the dilemma raised now that we have a precedent for a justice not recusing himself?

So, DaveShack, you are holding up the judiciary. Please either file your complaint or drop it.

 

[DaveShack]

A "new" JR has been filed (or the current one edited) so your prior actions are no longer relevant.

There is no deadline to withdraw and no complaint to rescind.

If the law is broken, I will file a complaint. Plain and simple. I don't feel like filing a complaint today, so it's a somewhat lucky thing that no laws are currently being broken..

Donsig, it's not up to me at this point, it's up to you. I'm not going to give you advance permission to break the law by promising never to file a complaint. In my opinion, not ruling does break the law, based on failing to be "speedy".

 

[donsig]

Donsig, it's not up to me at this point, it's up to you. I'm not going to give you advance permission to break the law by promising never to file a complaint.

Wasn't asking for such a promise. Just asked you to rescind your deadline, which you seem to have done. (Please correct me if this assumption of mine is wrong.)

I'll try not to break any laws today. If I do, feel free to file a complaint.

 

[Black_Hole]

actually donsig about your point about recalling justices, I have already filed a JR about this (and another possible unconstituitonal thing I found in the current CoL)

 

[ravensfire]

Mr. Chief Justice,

I would like a status update on the various matters before the Court, and when we might see those matters brought to a conclusion. There are several matters that are more than a week old without discussion on them. I would hope to see rulings on those soon.

Thank you,
-- Ravensfire

 

[Black_Hole]

Mr. Chief Justice,

I would like a status update on the various matters before the Court, and when we might see those matters brought to a conclusion. There are several matters that are more than a week old without discussion on them. I would hope to see rulings on those soon.

Thank you,
-- Ravensfire

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=3873695&postcount=2

I know I am behind on rulings, however if Strider's amendment goes through all other JRs don't matter anymore.

 

[ravensfire]

Mr. Chief Justice - I am most displeased with that attitude. His amendment has not yet passed review, nor has been even polled!

I have 3 requests outstanding, ALL of which were filed prior to his. 2 of them concern the current law, and are clearly relevant requests. The third is an amendment to the current law.

I request that the Judiciary rule on those items in the speedy manner required of them.

-- Ravensfire

 

[DaveShack]

I request that the Judiciary rule on those items in the speedy manner required of them.

Those old requests haven't been ruled on?

Honorable Justices, please, what is the holdup?

 

[Black_Hole]

Mr. Chief Justice - I am most displeased with that attitude. His amendment has not yet passed review, nor has been even polled!

I have 3 requests outstanding, ALL of which were filed prior to his. 2 of them concern the current law, and are clearly relevant requests. The third is an amendment to the current law.

I request that the Judiciary rule on those items in the speedy manner required of them.

-- Ravensfire

Sorry about my slowness and attitude, school has been rough lately but I will take care of judicial business.
I will be submitting JRs 11 and 12 later today and we are currently just waiting on the Judge Advocate for his ruling on your amendment.

 

[donsig]

Those old requests haven't been ruled on?

Honorable Justices, please, what is the holdup?

Part of the hold up is censors who invalidate polls. After last term's recusal fiasco I am hesitant to rule on JRs that are about polls I posted. I've made an honest effort to get some guidance from the assembly on this issue but have been blocked by the current Censor's refusal to validate the poll. He either needs to validate the poll or give me time to get one up that he will validate.

 

[donsig]

The proposed amendment seeks to replace 8.C.VI.VIA with a new version. The changes involve an explicit specification of the time frame within which a confirmation poll can be posted and the duration of said poll. A clause is added to confirm an appointee in his or her office until such time as the appointment is actually reversed by a confirmation poll.

I can find no laws or constitutional articles that prohibit the setting of time frames as in the proposed amendment nor can I find any laws or articles that prohibit an appointee from exercising official authority prior to the conclusion of a confirmation poll.

Therefore I find the proposed amendment does not conflict with existing laws.

donsig
Public Defender

 

[Black_Hole]

All three justices have come to the conclusion that JR#14 does not have any constitutional discrepancies and was submitted correctly.

An amendment poll has been posted here

 

[Black_Hole]

Chief Justice Ruling on JR # 11
Question:

Does Section 8.A.II and Section 8.A.I include appointed no-power duties like Chief Bureau's for the Information Department?

Relevant articles:

B) Limits to Holding Office
I. No member of the Triumvirate or the Judiciary may hold a second office.
II. Governors and Members of the Cabinet may hold up to two offices at the same time.

Constitution Article B.2.C:

The Right to be Eligible to hold Public Office

I actually have found two questions in Strider's single question. I have found that there is a conflict between the Code of Laws and Constitution about whether or not term limits can be allowed.
The other question is whether the article applies to non power holding positions.

Lets start with the second one. Nowhere in the Code of Laws or Constitution is there a non elected/appointed position. The Code of Laws obviously states as official as the Judiciary, Triumvirate, Cabinet, and Governors. Thus I find the power to create non power holding offices part of every citizen's freedom of speech as guaranteed by the constitution.

Second, the constitution clearly states that all citizens are eligible for office, so the Code of Laws has no authority to define term limits.

So to summarize:
1. The word official does not refer to non power holding offices.
2. The entire section 6 of the Code of Laws is unconstitutional.

I have my ruling for JR # 12 ready, however I will hold off ruling on it until we figure out whats going on.

 

[Nobody]

DG1JR15
Question: Proposed col amendment
Submitted by: Strider
I find that the proposed ammendment does not conflict with our laws. But remeber to make it clear it is replace the COL.

 

[Nobody]

DG1JR13
Questions:
1) Is there a required place for the office filling the position to post that they are looking for candidates?
2) Must the office filling the position wait 72 hours after that request to fill the office, or may someone be appointed before that time period?
3) If only one citizen applies during that 72 hour period, must the office filling the position appoint that citizen?
Submitted by: ravensfire
Judge Advocate Ruling: To be ruled upon: Coming soon just consulting with my fellow judges


.......................................................................................
*punchs Boxing bag* ooo i just read daveshack might be CCing Donsig.... ill smash him and bash him, ill tear him apart, ill make orphans of his children.

But really if someone breaks the law CC them, but please don't try to intimidate the Judicary. It can even back fire and make a judge rule against you just to not appear to be intimidated. (like last term)

 

[Black_Hole]

I am sorry to inform you of this. Due to unforseen personal matters, I immediatly resign from the office of Chief Justice. I am sorry for the inconveniance this will bring.

 

[donsig]

I am very sorry to hear this. I hope everything is ok.

 

[Strider]

I think the Judiciary may be cursed the past couple of terms.