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: Amendment to the Supreme Court Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: The Liberal Party
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: May 2586
Description[?]:
| The following amendments are going to be made to the Supreme Court Act 1- The Supreme shall have a member from each party with seats in Parliament with one vote per each Justice. 2- Parties with no seats in Parliament can only qualify if they have been formed at least for five years at the time of nomination. 3- All Justices will be replaced together, meaning all the nominees will be nominated together to avoid politics to leave any party out, and rejection will constitute rejection of all nominees. 4- Any Justice can recuse himself/herself but no replacement may be named. 5- Openings in the Supreme Court cannot be filled until the term has ended in which case clause 3 would aplly. 6- Parliament will confirm the nominees with more than 50% of the seats available at the time and according to clause 3. 7- When Supreme Court Justices would like to speak at the proceeding, they must write their names to be identified, otherwise it will be taken as being said by a party or party member. 8- When a tie occurs, the action is not declare unconstitutional, thus making it legal until further decision by the Supreme Court. 9- Each case is going to have a deadline of one year in which each side must be presented and the Justices must give their decision. If the deadline is reached and a Justice has not made his/her decision, his/her decision will not count. |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 10:27:50, June 01, 2008 CET | From | The Liberal Party | To | Debating the Amendment to the Supreme Court Act |
| Message | It will be put up for vote after the elections. |
| Date | 19:07:04, June 02, 2008 CET | From | The Liberal Party | To | Debating the Amendment to the Supreme Court Act |
| Message | Since the other Supreme Court bill is going to fail, unfortunately, this bill is the other best option. Every party gets a seat in the Supreme Court. |
| Date | 19:36:25, June 02, 2008 CET | From | Anarchist Party of Lodamun | To | Debating the Amendment to the Supreme Court Act |
| Message | I agree. |
| Date | 20:13:04, June 02, 2008 CET | From | The Liberal Party | To | Debating the Amendment to the Supreme Court Act |
| Message | LLP, is this the example you want to give to our citizens, ignore democracy as long as you remain in power but never give in to a more democratic way if you lose influence? |
| Date | 21:21:25, June 02, 2008 CET | From | Lodamun Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Amendment to the Supreme Court Act |
| Message | I want a gradual reform, not one this radical right now. I have proposed to expand the supreme court more gradually, and remember the voters decide the person who nominates the judges. |
| Date | 21:42:01, June 02, 2008 CET | From | The Liberal Party | To | Debating the Amendment to the Supreme Court Act |
| Message | But since that person makes a political inclined decision, that person should not be trusted with any nomination of the judiciary. My proposal is the most democratic and will give all parties a seat in the Court, they deserve it as members of Parliament. My proposal will also take away the political influence behind the nomination. I have said this before, you are looking for votes to your bill and any further expansions of the Court will surely be blocked by you and those in your coalition. |
| Date | 21:55:35, June 02, 2008 CET | From | Free Leftist Party | To | Debating the Amendment to the Supreme Court Act |
| Message | The Supreme Court situation is obviously one that needs to be addressed, but this proposition could allow for partisan bickering in a place where it should not be allowed. |
| Date | 22:24:12, June 02, 2008 CET | From | The Liberal Party | To | Debating the Amendment to the Supreme Court Act |
| Message | I think you are confusing it with the other. How will politics influence the Court if ALL parties have a member. |
| Date | 22:55:47, June 03, 2008 CET | From | Lodamun Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Amendment to the Supreme Court Act |
| Message | Because each party will bring a differnet policy into the supreme court and so we might end up with 9 different arguments instead of jsut 3 |
| Date | 22:57:12, June 03, 2008 CET | From | The Liberal Party | To | Debating the Amendment to the Supreme Court Act |
| Message | The more points of view we see, the more options we have to choose from, that is called democracy. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 67 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 61 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 22 |
| Random fact: Your user name is not your party name. Choose a concise and easy to remember user name. You can change your party name at any point in time later in the game. |
| Random quote: "Society comprises two classes: those who have more food than appetite, and those who have more appetite than food." - Nicolas Chamfort |