We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: The Supreme Court
Details
Submitted by[?]: Conservative Party of Lodamun
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill is a resolution. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: March 2564
Description[?]:
| The Supreme Court consists of 4 Associate Justices and 1 Chief Justice. The Supreme Court is used to decided on cases that have to do with the Constitution or any cases appealed from lower courts. (If a party wants to present a case they label it: ex. Supreme Court Case: Smith vs. Johnson; then the party will describe the case whether it is murder, treason, rape, or anything that has to do with the constitution in the description of the bill). The Chief Judge gets to choose the lawyers (parties, which can not be one of the judges) in the case. The judges on the supreme courts serve life terms (30 years) or if they do not make a decision on 3 cases in a row or if their party is inactive. The President gets to nominate the judges but they do need to be interviewed by Parliament and then voted upon. The bill will be posted as:ex. Supreme Judge Nominee: John Smith.One party can not have more than 1 judge from their party. During a trial the judges vote at the end of the trial.(When the bill is put to a vote). It matters how many judges vote yes (guilty) or no (not guilty). Not by the number of seats the party has. |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 05:59:41, April 17, 2008 CET |
From | The Liberal Party | To | Debating the The Supreme Court | | Message | I like this idea too. One small correction, the judges in the Supreme Court are named Justices. |
| Date | 11:19:59, April 17, 2008 CET |
From | Lodamun Libertarian Party | To | Debating the The Supreme Court | | Message | Yeah make it 20 or 30 years, not 100. With 5 judges tho we would need 7 parties to participate in the RP(5 judges+ a lawyer for each side) Maybe we should make it 3 judges, so then only 5 RP willing parties are needed |
| Date | 17:37:59, April 17, 2008 CET |
From | Lodamun Libertarian Party | To | Debating the The Supreme Court | | Message | yeah we got 9 parties, but the queston is do we got 7 parties who would participate in this? We will need 7 parties who are willing to RP this or its not gonna work |
| Date | 22:32:12, April 17, 2008 CET |
From | Lodamun Libertarian Party | To | Debating the The Supreme Court | | Message | because that would be a violation of the courts neutrality. You cant be the defence attorney and judge at the same time |
| Date | 05:42:26, April 18, 2008 CET |
From | United Republics Party | To | Debating the The Supreme Court | | Message | I believe this court would be packed with hawkish parties. In my opinion, placing an LP justice on the Supreme Court would be a disaster - otherwise I support. |
| Date | 07:05:46, April 18, 2008 CET |
From | The Liberal Party | To | Debating the The Supreme Court | | Message | I will definately vote for this bill. URP, when you get the presidency then don't nominate any judge from my party or don't vote to confirm one. But unfortunately for you, there are other parties who can vote. It seems like you don't know the concept of democracy and majority wins. Get over it! |
| Date | 12:43:24, April 18, 2008 CET |
From | Lodamun Libertarian Party | To | Debating the The Supreme Court | | Message | if there is 5 judges then it would still be 4 other judges in addition to the LP, and only 3 votes is needed to have a majority |
| Date | 05:15:04, April 19, 2008 CET |
From | United Republics Party | To | Debating the The Supreme Court | | Message | I'm in favor, but i'd like the first terms to be staggered AKA one 10 year term, one 20 year term, and one 30 year term. |
| Date | 06:58:06, April 19, 2008 CET |
From | The Liberal Party | To | Debating the The Supreme Court | | Message | Just to be clear, the Supreme Court does not take every case. When the case is appealed they decide whether or nor they are going to review it by voting. |
| Date | 12:34:33, April 19, 2008 CET |
From | Lodamun Libertarian Party | To | Debating the The Supreme Court | | Message | Yeah there is nothing who says the supreme court can deny reviewing a case.
Anyway it seems it was changed back to 5 judges, which in my opinion is too much as it would need 7 RP active parties to solve each case, so im gonna vpte no now, but if the nubmer of judges are lowered to 3 I will vote yes.
This bill will offcours need a 2/3 majority to pass just like the vice-president bill since its a constitutional change |
| Date | 19:28:18, April 19, 2008 CET |
From | The Liberal Party | To | Debating the The Supreme Court | | Message | It doesn't have to be my law to try to explain something. In all the countries of the real world, the Supreme Court doesn't review every case that is appealed to them, they vote on which ones they are going to review. |
| Date | 19:45:51, April 19, 2008 CET |
From | United Republics Party | To | Debating the The Supreme Court | | Message | It'd be nice if the court decided that instead of you. You're not entitled to make decisions without consultation despite your history of disregarding the PFP in the past. |
| Date | 19:48:18, April 19, 2008 CET |
From | The Liberal Party | To | Debating the The Supreme Court | | Message | I thought we had agreed on three, not five. It will take very long to decide on one case. I will do the same as LLP, vote no know, but if it gets changed to three, I will vote yes. |
| Date | 19:49:32, April 19, 2008 CET |
From | The Liberal Party | To | Debating the The Supreme Court | | Message | No during the debate, we had agreed on three, and was actually changed to three. I don't know why it was changed back to 5 before being put up for vote. |
| Date | 03:20:56, April 20, 2008 CET |
From | The Liberal Party | To | Debating the The Supreme Court | | Message | Just like you, I think we only need three Justices. If this bill is amended to only three Justices, I will definately vote for it. |
subscribe to this discussion -
unsubscribeVoting
| Vote |
Seats |
| yes | Total Seats: 78 |
| no | Total Seats: 70 |
| abstain | Total Seats: 2 |
| Random fact: Use a valid e-mail address for your Particracy account. If the e-mail address you entered does not exist, your account may be suspected of multi-accounting and inactivated. |
| Random quote: "A man who has no office to go to - I don't care who he is - is a trial of which you can have no conception." - George Bernard Shaw |