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: Abolish the Supreme Court

Details

Submitted by^[?]: The Liberal Party

Status^[?]: defeated

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 2582

Description^[?]:

Aside from being useless because it creates more problems than it solves, I propose the Supreme Court be abolished and any question of constitutionality be solved by a majority vote present in Parliament (by votes, not by parties). It doesn't necessarily needs to be more than 50%.

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date	20:40:41, May 23, 2008 CET
From	Lodamun Libertarian Party
To	Debating the Abolish the Supreme Court
Message	This would be a constitutional ammendment and require 2/3 of the vote And I like having the supreme court, since it provides a more stabile establishment to settle constitutional questions than the parliament, where a constiutional question could get a different response every 3rd year because of how the seats change during elections

Date	20:46:29, May 23, 2008 CET
From	The Liberal Party
To	Debating the Abolish the Supreme Court
Message	A constitutional question is only dealt with when it arises. It is the same with the Supreme Court, its decisions might change. This way is much more democratic, un-biased, and the problems will be solved, unlike the Supreme Court. Aside from being extremely biased, it causes more problem than it solves. With the Suprme Court the future of the country is in the hands of three people, sometimes only one. With my proposal, all parties will have some input.

Date	20:54:44, May 23, 2008 CET
From	Lodamun Libertarian Party
To	Debating the Abolish the Supreme Court
Message	It will definatly not be more un-biased, I would guess it would be more biased than the supreme court. And how does the SC create more problems than it solves? Because it hasent ruled you way so far?

Date	20:58:39, May 23, 2008 CET
From	The Liberal Party
To	Debating the Abolish the Supreme Court
Message	That might be one of the reasons but it creates more problems, especially when only ONE person decides. But I am sorry for wanting to give every party a chance to be heard and be part of the decision. Right, democracy is worthless for you, right?

Date	21:10:59, May 23, 2008 CET
From	Lodamun Libertarian Party
To	Debating the Abolish the Supreme Court
Message	Yeah which is exactly the reason im trying not to give to much power to the president (sarcasm)

Date	21:13:10, May 23, 2008 CET
From	The Liberal Party
To	Debating the Abolish the Supreme Court
Message	Hah, Hah. This proposal will make the process more democratic, everyone should have a chance to influence the decision, especially when it is an important decision, don't you agree?

Date	22:10:00, May 23, 2008 CET
From	Lodamun Libertarian Party
To	Debating the Abolish the Supreme Court
Message	I belive that judges, not politicians, should decided in constitutional cases

Date	23:00:38, May 23, 2008 CET
From	The Liberal Party
To	Debating the Abolish the Supreme Court
Message	But when judges are more biased than politicians, it is not a good idea. OOC: You know how the game works, it is the same person.

Date	23:01:20, May 23, 2008 CET
From	The Liberal Party
To	Debating the Abolish the Supreme Court
Message	Just remember, politicians write the Constitution, who better to interpret it than them.

Date	01:54:48, May 24, 2008 CET
From	Lodamun Libertarian Party
To	Debating the Abolish the Supreme Court
Message	judges, since they study the law

Date	01:59:01, May 24, 2008 CET
From	The Liberal Party
To	Debating the Abolish the Supreme Court
Message	All parties deserve the right to influence and vote on the decision. This proposal will allow all parties to have a say on the decision, democratically.

Date	02:42:27, May 24, 2008 CET
From	Pariah Idealism
To	Debating the Abolish the Supreme Court
Message	If you've got such a big issue with this why don't you make it so that the Supreme Court has one judge from each party. Therefore you don't have biased politicians, everyone gets a say, and no one person is making decisions.

Date	03:18:53, May 24, 2008 CET
From	The Liberal Party
To	Debating the Abolish the Supreme Court
Message	It is the same as having parties making decisions. Every party should have a say. I want to make the seats in Parliament count.

Date	10:39:57, May 24, 2008 CET
From	Lodamun Libertarian Party
To	Debating the Abolish the Supreme Court
Message	We must keep the judiciary and legislative branches seperate

Date	20:54:27, May 24, 2008 CET
From	The Liberal Party
To	Debating the Abolish the Supreme Court
Message	In order to make the most democratic, un-biased decision, every party should have a vote, they should have input on any case. The Supreme Court is simply incredible biased and useless.

Date	23:01:08, May 24, 2008 CET
From	Lodamun Libertarian Party
To	Debating the Abolish the Supreme Court
Message	I will not accept combining the legislative and judicary branch in any way. We can expand the supreme court, but I will not support disbanding it

Date	00:07:49, May 25, 2008 CET
From	The Liberal Party
To	Debating the Abolish the Supreme Court
Message	Don't support it then. But I can see why, you are in the Supreme Court, you don't need to disband it, right?

Date	00:09:27, May 25, 2008 CET
From	United Republics Party
To	Debating the Abolish the Supreme Court
Message	Didn't the LP appoint the first three justices? We didn't hear complaints then.

Date	00:18:47, May 25, 2008 CET
From	The Liberal Party
To	Debating the Abolish the Supreme Court
Message	I said from the beginning we had to modify the Supreme Court Act after it was passed, no one listened to me. I have tried to pass legislation but you have blocked it. If you favor democracy, you would vote for this democratic proposal. By the way, I could have appointed myself but I didn't. The Supreme Court is very biased and it creates more problems than it solves, especially when only you got to decide in one case.

Date	06:39:07, May 25, 2008 CET
From	Pariah Idealism
To	Debating the Abolish the Supreme Court
Message	I'm going to vote yes unless someone takes initiative and puts up a bill to expand the amount of judges on the supreme court to include a judge for every party.

Date	08:35:20, May 25, 2008 CET
From	The Liberal Party
To	Debating the Abolish the Supreme Court
Message	I would agree to that but I also want to make the seats count because it shows how the people want things to go.

Date	11:59:23, May 25, 2008 CET
From	Lodamun Libertarian Party
To	Debating the Abolish the Supreme Court
Message	You can go ahed and expand the supreme court, and I would support that, but do keep in my mind the supreme court needs rp active judges, which was the reason we introduced it at 3. But the other thing in this bill is the it basicly takes away the judiciary branchs power to interpret and enforce the laws the legislative branch makes. Remeber the principle of a 3 way seperation of power (legislative, executive, and judiciary). This strenghtens the legisative branch on the expense of the judiciary

Date	20:48:30, May 25, 2008 CET
From	Lodamun Libertarian Party
To	Debating the Abolish the Supreme Court
Message	bill failed

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote

Seats

yes

The Liberal Party (28)
Pariah Idealism (22)

Total Seats: 50

Total Seats: 69

abstain

The Meso Party (31)

Total Seats: 31

Random fact: By default the head of government is the ultimate authority within a national government. In general terms, heads of government are expected to consult with cabinet colleagues (including those from other parties) before making significant decisions but they remain responsible for government action.

Random quote: "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." - Barry Goldwater

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 74