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: SR 009: Supreme Court of Solentia Act of 2943
Details
Submitted by[?]: Conservative Party of Solentia
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: April 2946
Description[?]:
| SR 009: SCOSA-2943 -------------------------- Supreme Court of Solentia Act of 2943 Proposed By: Alexander Davis, Minister of Justice, Conservative Party of Solentia A BILL to create and empower a judicial arm of the government of Solentia so that proper checks may be placed upon the Senate to protect the people and heritage of the Nation. Be it enacted by the Senate of the Federal Republic of Solentia assembled, Section I: Short title. Article 1). This act may be cited as the 'Supreme Court of Solentia Act of 2943.' Section II: Senate findings. Article 1). The Senate of the Federal Republic of Solentia finds that the government of Solentia, though comprised of both a Legislative and an Executive arm, lacks the Judicial branch common to many Republics. Article 2). The Senate of the Federal Republic of Solentia finds that in order to create a balanced government, a Judicial branch is necessary to interpret the law and rule on any questions raised about the legality of legislation. Section III: Definitions. 'Supreme Court' means The Supreme Court of Solentia. Section IV: Proposals. Article 1). An entity known as the 'Supreme Court of Solentia' shall be created upon enactment of this Act. (A1, A) -------------- The Supreme Court shall be the Judicial branch of the Solentian government and shall be charged with interpreting legislation which is passed by the Senate of the Federal Republic, and shall hear trials and issue rulings on the legality of legislation, which may only be overturned by a subsequent differing ruling by the Supreme Court. Article 2). The Supreme Court shall be comprised of six Justices and 1 Chief Justice. (A2, A) -------------- The Justices of the Supreme Court shall be appointed by the Supreme President of Solentia and confirmed by a 50% + 1 vote in the Senate. (A2, B) -------------- The Justices shall serve terms of twenty one years, with a staggered system of replacements which shall allow for no more than two Justices to be replaced at a single time, except in the case defined in Subarticle a below. The staggering system shall follow the pattern started in the initial Supreme Court, as defined in Article 3 of this Act. Retiring Justices shall vacate their seats in June of their retiring year, and confirmed replacements shall assume their seats at this time. (A2, B, a) -------------- In the event that a Justice resigns his post (OOC: Or the party controlling goes inactive), his position becomes immediately available for replacement by the Supreme President at time of resignation. The Justice will assume his seat in the following June and only serve the remainder of the original Justice's term. (A2, C) -------------- The Chief Justice shall be one of the two longest serving Justices. In the event that they cannot decide amongst themselves which of them should be Chief Justice, the Supreme President shall decide, and that Justice shall remain Chief Justice until his term is complete. During a Chief Justice's term, the Court shall be referred to as his, and he shall set rules and procedure for all trials on which his Court rules. (A2, C, a) -------------- The Chief Justice shall appoint a Clerk, who may be any Solentian citizen of his choosing, whose duties shall be defined in Article 5 of this Act. Each Chief Justice may choose a new Clerk at any point during his term, and the Clerk's contact information must be published in the official log and register of the Supreme Court. Article 3). The initial composition of the Supreme Court shall be 1 Justice from each party, and 3 Justices who shall be chosen by the Supreme President of Solentia upon enactment of this Act. (A3, A) -------------- The tenures of the initial composition of the Supreme Court shall be determined by party age. The Justices from the UPS and CMP shall be replaced in 7 years from the enactment of this Act, the Justices from the CPS and FIP shall be replaced in 14 years, and one of the Justices seated by the Supreme President shall be replaced in 17 years, while two shall serve their full 21 year terms. The Supreme President shall state in his appointment bills which of the two full term Justices he wishes to serve as the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Article 4). The Court which rules on a case shall be the Court to which the clerk first submitted a Motion to Hear. A case which continues past the replacement date of a Justice must still be ruled on by that Justice. In order to issue a ruling, a quorum of 5 of the 7 Justices must be present at voting. (A4, A) -------------- In the event that a Justice resigns his post (OOC: Or the party controlling goes inactive) during a case, his vote is considered to be 'neutral' and the Court shall proceed without if a quorum is maintained. No new Justice may rule on a case in which he did not vote in the Motion to Hear. Article 5). It shall be the duty of the Supreme Court Clerk to hear potential Supreme Court cases, present them to the Court in Motions to Hear, and to organize and report the opinions and rulings of the Court. (A5, A) -------------- Upon submission of a Motion to Hear, the Supreme Court shall vote on whether or not it shall hear and rule on a case as presented by the Clerk. In order for a case to move to trial, 3 of the 7 Justices must vote in the affirmative on the Motion to Hear. (A5, B) -------------- Upon approval of a Motion to Hear, the Clerk shall create a bill whose title is the docket number of the trial along with any informal title deemed fit. This bill shall house the proceedings of the trial and shall be declared closed once the Supreme Court has voted and ruled, and each Justice who wishes to has submitted an official opinion for the record, and the Clerk has reported the votes. No one may speak in the bill unless so ordered by the Chief Justice. (A5, B, a) -------------- Docket numbers shall be standardized to look as follows: SCC-YEAR-NUM where 'SCC' means Supreme Court Case, YEAR shall be substituted with the year of the submission of the Motion to Hear, and NUM shall be the number of the Supreme Court Case that have been submitted that year. (eg. SCC-2943-001) Article 6). During a Supreme Presidency which will see a vacancy on the Court, the Supreme President may announce his nominations for questioning and confirmation by the Senate. Nominations MUST be announced at least a year prior to the end of a retiring Justice's term, so that questioning and confirmation may be completed before the term is complete. Confirmation shall be decided as defined in Section IV, Article 2, Subsection A of this Act. Each nominated Justice must be questioned and voted upon individually. In the event of an early election where nominees for Justice have been submitted by a Supreme President who is voted out of office, no new candidates may be nominated unless the originals are rejected by due process in the Senate. Section V: Approval by Minister of Justice. Article 1). This Act has been approved by Minister of Justice Alexander Davis. Section VI: Rules. Article 1). This Act requires a 2/3rds majority in favor by the Senate to take effect. Article 2). This Act will remain in effect until voted down by a 2/3rds majority of the Senate. |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 04:15:52, May 25, 2010 CET | From |  Conservative Party of Solentia | To | Debating the SR 009: Supreme Court of Solentia Act of 2943 |
| Message | For the input of the Senate, this bill is placed on the floor for debate! Minister of Justice Alexander Davis |
| Date | 04:53:50, May 25, 2010 CET | From | Coalition for National Unity [CNU] | To | Debating the SR 009: Supreme Court of Solentia Act of 2943 |
| Message | The CMP finds that we concur with this Act in it's entirety. We grant full support. Dr. Catherine Keller, Deputy Leader of the CMP. |
| Date | 05:53:27, May 25, 2010 CET | From | Utilitarian Party of Solentia | To | Debating the SR 009: Supreme Court of Solentia Act of 2943 |
| Message | The Utilitarian Party of Solentia is willing to work to make this proposed court a reality. We do recommend that a first case be heard and that with those first proceedings guidelines for future reference be created. We nevertheless consider that further explanations are needed in several regards: Regarding the clerk - How will the Chief Justice appoint the clerk? Will the clerk be a Justice, a former Justice or whoever? How long will his tenure last? What happens if he refuses to present and/or to submit the bills? How can you contact the clerk? Regarding the rulings of the court - Do the Justices need to express a neutral legal opinion? Or would it be acceptable to have politically active Justices? What about former party leaders? Do Justices need to be lawyers endorsed by a party, but with an unbiased opinion? [OOC: Can Justices be racists, radicals, criminals, or should we try to rule inasmuch as possible according to the rule; i.e. can Justices refuse logical arguments with fallacies?] Regarding the validity of the rulings - Why can their decisions be overruled by a 2/3 majority? Can the court eventually rule those overruling as illegal? Of the aforementioned points, the Utilitarian Party of Solentia is most worried about the 2/3 majority needed to overrule an interpretation of the court. In our opinion, if something is illegal under the law, as long as the law isn't changed, then it would still be illegal even if 100% of the Senate votes it is not. We will be closely following the debate. |
| Date | 16:05:52, May 25, 2010 CET | From | Conservative Party of Solentia | To | Debating the SR 009: Supreme Court of Solentia Act of 2943 |
| Message | CHANGES: Section IV, Article 1, Subsection A, which formerly read: "The Supreme Court shall be the Judicial branch of the Solentian government and shall be charged with interpreting legislation which is passed by the Senate of the Federal Republic, and shall hear trials and issue rulings on the legality of legislation, which may only be overturned by a 2/3rds vote of the Senate." Now reads: "The Supreme Court shall be the Judicial branch of the Solentian government and shall be charged with interpreting legislation which is passed by the Senate of the Federal Republic, and shall hear trials and issue rulings on the legality of legislation, which may only be overturned by a subsequent differing ruling by the Supreme Court." Section IV, Article 2, Subsection D, Subarticle a, which formerly read: "The Chief Justice shall appoint a Clerk whose duties shall be defined in Article 5 of this Act." Now reads: "The Chief Justice shall appoint a Clerk, who may be any Solentian citizen of his choosing, whose duties shall be defined in Article 5 of this Act. Each Chief Justice may choose a new Clerk at any point during his term, and the Clerk's contact information must be published in the official log and register of the Supreme Court." Section IV, Article 5, Subsection A, which formerly read: "Upon submission of a Motion to Hear, the Supreme Court shall vote on whether or not it shall hear and rule on a case as presented by the Clerk. A simple majority of Justices voting to hear is necessary to proceed to trial." Now reads: "Upon submission of a Motion to Hear, the Supreme Court shall vote on whether or not it shall hear and rule on a case as presented by the Clerk. In order for a case to move to trial, 3 of the 7 Justices must vote in the affirmative on the Motion to Hear." Section IV, Article 5, Subsection B, which formerly read: "Upon approval of a Motion to Hear, the Clerk shall create a bill whose title is the docket number of the trial along with any informal title deemed fit." Now reads: "Upon approval of a Motion to Hear, the Clerk shall create a bill whose title is the docket number of the trial along with any informal title deemed fit. This bill shall house the proceedings of the trial and shall be declared closed once the Supreme Court has voted and ruled, and each Justice who wishes to has submitted an official opinion for the record, and the Clerk has reported the votes. No one may speak in the bill unless so ordered by the Chief Justice." These changes are made to address the FIP's comments here: http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=291993 and adopt his suggestions for "Minimum Requirement to Hear a Case", as well as further define where the trial will be housed and how it will be run, without dictating too much procedure which should be decided in my opinion by the Chief Justice based on precedent. They also define who the Clerk may be, and how he may be chosen, and do away with the Senate's power to overturn Court rulings in favor of allowing Supreme Courts the capability to overturn their own previous decisions. |
| Date | 20:04:00, May 25, 2010 CET | From | Utilitarian Party of Solentia | To | Debating the SR 009: Supreme Court of Solentia Act of 2943 |
| Message | The Utilitarian Party of Solentia is most in favour with these changes. We still wonder about the issues of role-playing the judges. Do you expect judges to vote following party lines? And does anyone propose a method for taking into consideration the Senate in the nomination process? |
| Date | 21:04:19, May 25, 2010 CET | From | Coalition for National Unity [CNU] | To | Debating the SR 009: Supreme Court of Solentia Act of 2943 |
| Message | There are rebels in every party. The CMP has developed a strong reputation over the years for brutal backbench politics, backstabbing and the likes. No doubt that would be reflected in the stark contrast between our justices. The FIP too vary from left to right as the generations pass. It's only politically natural. |
| Date | 21:51:36, May 25, 2010 CET | From | Conservative Party of Solentia | To | Debating the SR 009: Supreme Court of Solentia Act of 2943 |
| Message | OOC: Yeah, UPS. Like I said in the other thread, we can't enforce a law stating that every Justice must be RPed, but we will strongly encourage it through precedent. Some Justices may vote against the will of the party that roleplays them, we just can't force it to happen, we have to hope that it happens naturally. The FIP in the other thread suggested 55% Senate approval is required for seating a Justice, but I responded, so let's wait and see what he says before making a decision. |
| Date | 03:31:26, May 26, 2010 CET | From | Federal Independent Party | To | Debating the SR 009: Supreme Court of Solentia Act of 2943 |
| Message | The establishment of powers in the judicial branch is an extremely momentous occasion and a critical decision by the Senate. In order for us to support this legislation, we request the minimum support needed for the bill to pass be 67% or 2/3 of the Senate's current composition. This is no simple matter and it should require a supermajority of the Senate to push through as law. Senate Majority Leader Quincy Seville |
| Date | 03:35:32, May 26, 2010 CET | From | Utilitarian Party of Solentia | To | Debating the SR 009: Supreme Court of Solentia Act of 2943 |
| Message | I believe that there must be a way to role play the Senate questioning the Justices, so a compromise would be that the Senate can object once; the second time, the Supreme President needs to have different candidates from different parties as the one in the first nomination. This second nominees the Senate can no longer object, but we would have already achieved making the Supreme President nominate a different combination What would you think about this? It would require an agreement from all of us and a promise from all the parties, that if the first choices of the Supreme President don't garner enough support, the he will propose people from different parties. |
| Date | 03:36:45, May 26, 2010 CET | From | Utilitarian Party of Solentia | To | Debating the SR 009: Supreme Court of Solentia Act of 2943 |
| Message | Remember, only the first 4 Justices of the first court would not serve their whole term. It is only to ensure the Court is working at the beginning. |
| Date | 01:31:48, May 27, 2010 CET | From | Conservative Party of Solentia | To | Debating the SR 009: Supreme Court of Solentia Act of 2943 |
| Message | CHANGES: Section IV, Article 2, Subsection A, which formerly read: "The Justices of the Supreme Court shall be six appointed by the Supreme President of Solentia and one who is the Minister of Justice of Solentia." Now reads: "The Justices of the Supreme Court shall be appointed by the Supreme President of Solentia and confirmed by a 50% + 1 vote in the Senate." Section IV, Article 2, Subsection B, which formerly read: "The six appointed Justices shall serve terms of twenty one years, with two being replaced every 7 years." Now reads: "The Justices shall serve terms of twenty one years, with a staggered system of replacements which shall allow for no more than two Justices to be replaced at a single time, except in the case defined in Subarticle a below. The staggering system shall be follow the pattern started in the initial Supreme Court, as defined in Article 3 of this Act." Section IV, Article 2, Subsection C, which formerly read: "The Minister of Justice shall serve the length of his ministry as the seventh Supreme Court Justice." has been removed. Section IV, Article 2, Subsection D and all Subarticles are now named Subsection C. Section IV, Article 2, Subsection C, which formerly read: "The Chief Justice shall be one of the two longest serving Justices. In the event that they cannot decide amongst themselves which of them should be Chief Justice, the Minister of Justice shall decide, and that Justice shall remain Chief Justice until his term is complete. During a Chief Justice's term, the Court shall be referred to as his, and he shall set rules and procedure for all trials on which his Court rules." Now reads: "The Chief Justice shall be one of the two longest serving Justices. In the event that they cannot decide amongst themselves which of them should be Chief Justice, the Supreme President shall decide, and that Justice shall remain Chief Justice until his term is complete. During a Chief Justice's term, the Court shall be referred to as his, and he shall set rules and procedure for all trials on which his Court rules." Section IV, Article 3, which formerly read: "The initial composition of the Supreme Court shall be 1 Justice from each party, 2 Justices who shall be chosen by the Supreme President of Solentia upon enactment of this Act, and the Minister of Justice of Solentia." Now reads: "The initial composition of the Supreme Court shall be 1 Justice from each party, and 3 Justices who shall be chosen by the Supreme President of Solentia upon enactment of this Act." Section IV, Article 3, Subsection A, which formerly read: "The tenures of the initial composition of the Supreme Court shall be determined by party age. The Justices from the UPS and CMP shall be replaced in 7 years from the enactment of this Act, the Justices from the CPS and FIP shall be replaced in 14 years, and the two Justices seated by the Supreme President shall serve their full 21 year terms. The Minister of Justice shall serve as Chief Justice of this interim Court." Now reads: "The tenures of the initial composition of the Supreme Court shall be determined by party age. The Justices from the UPS and CMP shall be replaced in 7 years from the enactment of this Act, the Justices from the CPS and FIP shall be replaced in 14 years, and one of the Justices seated by the Supreme President shall be replaced in 17 years, while two shall serve their full 21 year terms. The Supreme President shall state in his appointment bills which of the two full term Justices he wishes to serve as the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court." Section IV, Article 4, which formerly read: "The Court which rules on a case shall be the Court to which the clerk first submitted a Motion to Hear. A case which continues past the replacement date of a Justice must still be ruled on by that Justice." Now reads: "The Court which rules on a case shall be the Court to which the clerk first submitted a Motion to Hear. A case which continues past the replacement date of a Justice must still be ruled on by that Justice. In order to issue a ruling, a quorum of 5 of the 7 Justices must be present at voting." Section IV, Article 4, Subsection A, which formerly read: "In the event that a Justice resigns his post (OOC: Or the party controlling goes inactive) during a case, his vote is considered to be 'neutral' and the Court shall proceed without. No new Justice may rule on a case in which he did not vote in the Motion to Hear." Now reads: "In the event that a Justice resigns his post (OOC: Or the party controlling goes inactive) during a case, his vote is considered to be 'neutral' and the Court shall proceed without if a quorum is maintained. No new Justice may rule on a case in which he did not vote in the Motion to Hear." Section VI, Article 1, which formerly read: "This Act requires a 50% vote in favor by the Senate to take effect." Now reads: "This Act requires a 2/3rds majority in favor by the Senate to take effect." ADDITIONS: Section IV, Article 6, which reads: "At any point during a Supreme Presidency which will be responsible for the nomination of one or more Justices, the Supreme President may announce his nominations for questioning and confirmation by the Senate. Nominations MUST be announced at least a year prior to the end of a retiring Justice's term, so that questioning and confirmation may be completed before the term is complete. Confirmation shall be decided as defined in Section IV, Article 2, Subsection A of this Act. Each nominated Justice must be questioned and voted upon individually." |
| Date | 04:12:34, May 27, 2010 CET | From | Federal Independent Party | To | Debating the SR 009: Supreme Court of Solentia Act of 2943 |
| Message | Article 3). The initial composition of the Supreme Court shall be 1 Justice from each party, 2 Justices who shall be chosen by the Supreme President of Solentia upon enactment of this Act, and the Minister of Justice of Solentia. - I believe we rid the MoJ from the court. |
| Date | 04:13:34, May 27, 2010 CET | From | Federal Independent Party | To | Debating the SR 009: Supreme Court of Solentia Act of 2943 |
| Message | And are you going to put in the part about the necessary quorum of 5 of 7 justice present to rule on a case after deliberation and arguments? |
| Date | 04:16:41, May 27, 2010 CET | From | Conservative Party of Solentia | To | Debating the SR 009: Supreme Court of Solentia Act of 2943 |
| Message | OOC: Apologies, apparently I changed article 3 in my summary but not in the bill. It's been fixed now. The quorum is defined in Article 4 of Section IV. |
| Date | 04:48:20, May 27, 2010 CET | From | Federal Independent Party | To | Debating the SR 009: Supreme Court of Solentia Act of 2943 |
| Message | OOC: Looks good to me, we should wrap things up and get this show on the road. |
| Date | 04:49:13, May 27, 2010 CET | From | Conservative Party of Solentia | To | Debating the SR 009: Supreme Court of Solentia Act of 2943 |
| Message | OOC: Waiting for final voices from the UPS and CMP then I'll send it to vote! |
| Date | 05:44:44, May 27, 2010 CET | From | Utilitarian Party of Solentia | To | Debating the SR 009: Supreme Court of Solentia Act of 2943 |
| Message | OOC: I propose the law specifies that all new Justices assume their seats at a standard time of the year; say all Justices must assume office on September 1st or any month you find appropriate. Just remember elections are in August and you will need one year for confirmation. So if the Supreme President assumes office in August, September next year (13 months after) will his nominees be approved. August is usually late in my time zone, so if judges assume office in June (20:00 CET) [July and December start at 00:00 CET] it would be fine. So in this case, 10 months after the election (assuming no early elections will be called) the nominees must start confirmation process (they can start before but not later) and 22 months after the election they assume office. I therefore propose the First Supreme Court of Solentia starts working on June 2947 or before, but always starting in June. Does anybody have anything against? One more thing. It is important that the Supreme President has at least one year for nominating, but it is not right if the Justices will start serving once he is no longer in the post. So how do we work this out? If the tenure of a Supreme President is over in 1 1/2 years, he should not have the chance of proposing Justices which will not start serving during his term; so I propose you explicitly state that the Supreme President can only nominate persons for places in the court if during his tenure one or more seats becomes vacant. This way we ensure no "waiting list" ever exists. Also, if we state that he can only nominate people to seats which will be vacant, their is no risk for him if early elections do occur. So basically, if during your tenure a spot will open, you should nominate as soon as possible in order to ensure that even if an early election happens, your nominees will be voted and not the ones from the new Supreme President. Second thing. Will the two judges be proposed in the same bill, or each one of them in a different bill? I thought we could have them in the same bill, and if it seems they will not get enough votes, the Supreme President can change their names in the debate. Other thing, what happens if the nominees don't get Senatorial support? How long can the places remain vacant, and will the upcoming Supreme President get a chance of filling the vacancies? What happens if in a case there is not enough quorum because 3 Justices retired (their parties went inactive)? The case will need to start over again? We should also order a standard format for presenting the nominees. Since it seems that senatorial courtesy will be important, how do I role-play the curriculum of a Justice from my party? Which courts already exist? I remember we have a law saying that there currently exists only a national court... so how do I role play? Because if we will need senatorial consent, we are implying that the parties submitting Justices will need to role-play at least a bit if we want our Justices to have some previous experience. Besides, does any of you know if the new player (Meritocracy Society) will play along? If he does, I propose he gets one spot in the court. He and the UPS would get the 7 year terms, CMP and CPS 14 years and FIP 17 years. Just make these changes if everybody agrees. I brought my proposals about specifying things (early elections, waiting lists, times) just to ensure no loopholes exist. Once done, you have my full support. |
| Date | 16:15:51, May 27, 2010 CET | From | Coalition for National Unity [CNU] | To | Debating the SR 009: Supreme Court of Solentia Act of 2943 |
| Message | OOC: I have no issue, though I'd mention that we'd need to look at timezones as far as nominations go. I may actually be asleep when I am meant to be nominating my justices. :P |
| Date | 03:26:13, May 28, 2010 CET | From | Utilitarian Party of Solentia | To | Debating the SR 009: Supreme Court of Solentia Act of 2943 |
| Message | I know, that is the reason I proposed June: June is 20:00 CET (UTC +1); England would be at about 19:00, quite a nice time, don´t you think? On this side of the Atlantic, 13:00 would be just fine; if in June they assume their post, we have two days to proposes them, so I find June fine. |
| Date | 03:49:36, May 28, 2010 CET | From | Conservative Party of Solentia | To | Debating the SR 009: Supreme Court of Solentia Act of 2943 |
| Message | CHANGES: Section IV, Article 2, Subsection B, which formerly read: "The Justices shall serve terms of twenty one years, with a staggered system of replacements which shall allow for no more than two Justices to be replaced at a single time, except in the case defined in Subarticle a below. The staggering system shall follow the pattern started in the initial Supreme Court, as defined in Article 3 of this Act." Now reads: "The Justices shall serve terms of twenty one years, with a staggered system of replacements which shall allow for no more than two Justices to be replaced at a single time, except in the case defined in Subarticle a below. The staggering system shall follow the pattern started in the initial Supreme Court, as defined in Article 3 of this Act. Retiring Justices shall vacate their seats in June of their retiring year, and confirmed replacements shall assume their seats at this time." Section IV, Article 2, Subsection B, Subarticle a, which formerly read: "In the event that a Justice resigns his post (OOC: Or the party controlling goes inactive), his position becomes immediately available for replacement." Now reads: "In the event that a Justice resigns his post (OOC: Or the party controlling goes inactive), his position becomes immediately available for replacement by the Supreme President at time of resignation. The Justice will assume his seat in the following June and only serve the remainder of the original Justice's term." Section IV, Article 6, which formerly read: "At any point during a Supreme Presidency which will be responsible for the nomination of one or more Justices, the Supreme President may announce his nominations for questioning and confirmation by the Senate. Nominations MUST be announced at least a year prior to the end of a retiring Justice's term, so that questioning and confirmation may be completed before the term is complete. Confirmation shall be decided as defined in Section IV, Article 2, Subsection A of this Act. Each nominated Justice must be questioned and voted upon individually." Now reads: "During a Supreme Presidency which will see a vacancy on the Court, the Supreme President may announce his nominations for questioning and confirmation by the Senate. Nominations MUST be announced at least a year prior to the end of a retiring Justice's term, so that questioning and confirmation may be completed before the term is complete. Confirmation shall be decided as defined in Section IV, Article 2, Subsection A of this Act. Each nominated Justice must be questioned and voted upon individually." |
| Date | 04:00:07, May 28, 2010 CET | From | Conservative Party of Solentia | To | Debating the SR 009: Supreme Court of Solentia Act of 2943 |
| Message | FINAL CHANGE: Section IV, Article 6, which formerly read: "During a Supreme Presidency which will see a vacancy on the Court, the Supreme President may announce his nominations for questioning and confirmation by the Senate. Nominations MUST be announced at least a year prior to the end of a retiring Justice's term, so that questioning and confirmation may be completed before the term is complete. Confirmation shall be decided as defined in Section IV, Article 2, Subsection A of this Act. Each nominated Justice must be questioned and voted upon individually." Now reads: "During a Supreme Presidency which will see a vacancy on the Court, the Supreme President may announce his nominations for questioning and confirmation by the Senate. Nominations MUST be announced at least a year prior to the end of a retiring Justice's term, so that questioning and confirmation may be completed before the term is complete. Confirmation shall be decided as defined in Section IV, Article 2, Subsection A of this Act. Each nominated Justice must be questioned and voted upon individually. In the event of an early election where nominees for Justice have been submitted by a Supreme President who is voted out of office, no new candidates may be nominated unless the originals are rejected by due process in the Senate." |
| Date | 06:16:42, May 28, 2010 CET | From | Utilitarian Party of Solentia | To | Debating the SR 009: Supreme Court of Solentia Act of 2943 |
| Message | The Utilitarian Party of Solentia regards this bill as triumph of good governance. The present political parties are ensuring and upright future for our Solentia and we are looking forward to questioning the first nominees. We consider on last final note. Which will be the procedure if on a case which is ready to be voted no quorum exists? Will the case be once again submitted to a new court, or will the court simply consider it out of its capabilities? |
| Date | 05:51:06, May 29, 2010 CET | From | Utilitarian Party of Solentia | To | Debating the SR 009: Supreme Court of Solentia Act of 2943 |
| Message | We hereby approve of this bill. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 100 | |||||||
| no | Total Seats: 0 | |||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: In Culturally Protected nations, special care must be taken to ensure realism is maintained when role-playing a government controlled by an ethnic and/or religious minority. If it is to be supposed that this government is supported by a majority of the population, then this should be plausibly and sufficiently role-played. The burden of proof is on the player or players role-playing such a regime to demonstrate that it is being done realistically |
| Random quote: "No man has ever been born a Negro hater, a Jew hater, or any other kind of hater. Nature refuses to be involved in such suicidal practices." - Harry Bridges |