Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: March 5548
Next month in: 00:59:39
Server time: 03:00:20, September 21, 2024 CET
Currently online (0): Record: 63 on 23:13:00, July 26, 2019 CET

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: Case before the 22nd Constitutional Court: Rom vs Sebastian: Voting Copy

Details

Submitted by[?]: Revolutionary Freedom Party -- KEG SLAM

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: June 2747

Description[?]:

There are three options/positions expressed, thus, voting will be a little complex.

The first position is that of Justice Chattan. Justice Chattan opinion states that the Court is finalized when the president calls the court seated. This is seen as an extension of Civits vs. Bunker, which stated that for a newly formed party to seat a justice, that party must have formed between the time the court is called and the time the court is seated. This suggests that the court is finalized when then President declares the court seated, and thus, justices cannot be seated if appointed to the court after the court is seated. If you agree with this position, votes YES, and state that you agree with Justice CHATTAN.

The second position is that of Justice Ascili, that the president has the power to seat a justice after the court is declared seated. This is the doctrine of Full Power, the idea that the President has the full power to seat the court, and can seat a justice after the court is declared seated. If you agree with this position, vote YES, and state that you agree with Justice ASCILI.

The third position is that of Justice Dinard, which states that the Constitutional Court does not have the power to decide this question, and that it is a question for the legislature, and should be determined there. If you agree with this position, vote NO, and, optionally state that you agree with Justice DINARD.

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date00:15:18, April 26, 2009 CET
FromRevolutionary Freedom Party -- KEG SLAM
ToDebating the Case before the 22nd Constitutional Court: Rom vs Sebastian: Voting Copy
MessageJustice Chattan of the RFP votes yes, in favor of the position held by Justice CHATTAN.

Date05:00:53, April 26, 2009 CET
FromLibertarian Democrats
ToDebating the Case before the 22nd Constitutional Court: Rom vs Sebastian: Voting Copy
MessageCivits vs. Bunker! Yes!

Date06:51:42, April 26, 2009 CET
FromCathartic Crisis Coalition
ToDebating the Case before the 22nd Constitutional Court: Rom vs Sebastian: Voting Copy
MessageCCC votes yes in favor of the opinion of Justice Ascili.

Date07:05:06, April 26, 2009 CET
FromRevolutionary Freedom Party -- KEG SLAM
ToDebating the Case before the 22nd Constitutional Court: Rom vs Sebastian: Voting Copy
MessageDFCK, does that mean that you are voting with Chattan, since that is the one based off of Civits vs Bunker, or are you voting in favor of Ascili's position?

Date08:46:33, April 26, 2009 CET
FromSocialist Party of Kalistan (SPoK)
ToDebating the Case before the 22nd Constitutional Court: Rom vs Sebastian: Voting Copy
MessageHow many seats do we have on the court? Either way, all SPoK seats vote NO. If we lose this vote, we would like to write an official dissent.

Date19:52:17, April 26, 2009 CET
FromRevolutionary Freedom Party -- KEG SLAM
ToDebating the Case before the 22nd Constitutional Court: Rom vs Sebastian: Voting Copy
Messagetwo, George and Dinard.

And you can always write a dissent.

Date20:07:00, April 26, 2009 CET
FromCathartic Crisis Coalition
ToDebating the Case before the 22nd Constitutional Court: Rom vs Sebastian: Voting Copy
MessageSo then what is the official count? is it 2 CCC judges, 1RFP Judge and 1 DFCK judge in favor and 2 SPoK judges opposing?

Date22:52:31, April 26, 2009 CET
FromPansexual Peace Party -- FNORD
ToDebating the Case before the 22nd Constitutional Court: Rom vs Sebastian: Voting Copy
MessageWe agree with Justice Dinard. Seating of the court is something for the legislature to decide.

Date00:07:15, April 27, 2009 CET
FromRevolutionary Freedom Party -- KEG SLAM
ToDebating the Case before the 22nd Constitutional Court: Rom vs Sebastian: Voting Copy
MessageOfficial count

Position of Justice Chattan
Justice Chattan
(UPM did not seat a justice)

Position of Justice Ascili
Justice Ascili
Justice Seabread



Position of Justice Dinard
Justice Dinard
Justice George
Justice McGee

Date00:45:04, April 27, 2009 CET
FromCathartic Crisis Coalition
ToDebating the Case before the 22nd Constitutional Court: Rom vs Sebastian: Voting Copy
MessageSo, if the current count remains unchanged, will the court decide in favor of Justice Dinard's opinion? If so, Justice Ascili would like to reserve the right to write a dissenting opinion.

Date02:04:23, April 27, 2009 CET
FromSocialist Party of Kalistan (SPoK)
ToDebating the Case before the 22nd Constitutional Court: Rom vs Sebastian: Voting Copy
MessageIt would be tied, between yes and no. Whoever casts the tie breaker determines who writes the opinion of the court. If it is yes, the Other yes position writes a concurrent decision, while the no writes the dissent, and other no justices can write concurrent dissents.

Date05:15:24, April 27, 2009 CET
FromRevolutionary Freedom Party -- KEG SLAM
ToDebating the Case before the 22nd Constitutional Court: Rom vs Sebastian: Voting Copy
MessageIt woldn't be tied according to my count

Justice Chattan: 1

Justic Ascili: 2

Justice Dinard: 3

Date21:21:33, April 27, 2009 CET
FromSocialist Party of Kalistan (SPoK)
ToDebating the Case before the 22nd Constitutional Court: Rom vs Sebastian: Voting Copy
MessageThere's three yeses all together, and three for no. The question is whether the President can deny a Party a seat. The only difference between the two yes votes is the reasoning. Whoever casts the tie breaker should do so and then select a person to write the opinion of the court.

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
   

Total Seats: 234

no
  

Total Seats: 323

abstain
  

Total Seats: 193


Random fact: In Culturally Protected nations, it is the responsibility of players to ensure the candidate boxes on their Party Overview screens are filled in with appropriate names. If a player is allotted seats in a Cabinet bill and has not filled in names for the relevant candidate position, then the program will automatically fill in the positions with names which might not necessarily be appropriate for the Cultural Protocols.

Random quote: "The word 'politics' is derived from the word 'poly', meaning 'many', and the word 'ticks', meaning 'blood sucking parasites.'" - Larry Hardiman

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 69