Supreme Court Nomination: Chief Justice

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Supreme Court Nomination: Chief Justice

Post  Cool Egg Sandwich on Sun Mar 13, 2011 10:41 pm

As per the powers delegated to the Founder in our Constitution, I would like to formally present my nomination for Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of The Dirty South.

With that, I take great pleasure in my appointment of 'Architektonikon' to the office of Chief Justice.



Naturally, this appointment will have to be verified through a direct vote by the General Assembly; however, since we currently do not have a Speaker of the Assembly (Deputy Premier), motions may not be brought to a vote.

I would, however, like the Assembly to take the time to present their questions for Architektonikon.


Rgds.,

_________________
~The Little Green Ghouls of Cool Egg Sandwich alien
(WA Delegate / Premier)

~Teh Dirty South Boss geek
(Founder)
avatar
Cool Egg Sandwich
Admin

Posts : 506
Join date : 2011-01-25
Age : 29
Location : City of Champs

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Supreme Court Nomination: Chief Justice

Post  Serenel on Sun Mar 13, 2011 11:17 pm

I would first like to thank the founder for his timely appointment of Architektonikon, hopefully this appointee shall be the begining of a long, and prosperious begining to the Supreme Court.

however, now i direct my attention to Architektonikon.

being the first Cheif Justice of the Supreme Court, you are going to have to take on more then just a 'care takers' role.

You shall be setting precedent in almost every single thing you do, no matter how minute it may seem to you at the time.

from how you interact as a General Assembly member, to the regulations you create as Cheif Justice, to how, and when you post, if at all, if you vote for motions, if you even debate motions.

So, i suppose i would, most importantly like to just lay that upon you, for personal reflection atleast, if this has not crossed your mind already.

now i shall move on to a more formal setting of the questions i have for you.

1. Do you believe you are active enough to be given a position in the Dirty Souths government? especially a position so power as the Chief Justice, a sole seat on the Supreme Court, answerable to arguably no one.

2. How many times have you read the constitution of the Dirty South? do you think you are firmiliar with the governing document of this region?

These are just general questions to kind of lay the ground work for further questions i may have.

i look forward to your answers, and the furtherment of this process.
avatar
Serenel

Posts : 469
Join date : 2011-02-13
Age : 28
Location : Maryland

View user profile

Back to top Go down

response

Post  Architektonikon on Mon Mar 14, 2011 8:15 pm

Serenel,

I have read the whole constitution numerous times and confidently feel that fully understand it and can rehearse it anytime. Also, if it is any consolation, I have read it so closely that I can point out (if someone wants to fix them) several grammatical mistakes. Above all of this, I participated in the drafting process. This only serves to further my understanding of the constitution. Moreover, I think I am active enough to hold this office.
avatar
Architektonikon

Posts : 58
Join date : 2011-01-26
Location : Canada

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Supreme Court Nomination: Chief Justice

Post  Serenel on Mon Mar 14, 2011 8:35 pm

Very Good!

I do believe the General Assembly will see fit to 'Clean Up' the constitution a bit once everyone gets settled in, thank you very much for bringing such concerns to our attention.

Moving on however.

Do you ever think it would be acceptable, when in determining a case to apply real life examples, which may go with the scenario perfectly, to a situation arising in our region?

Furthermore, it may be over-reaching to attempt and access your judicial opinion on a hypothetical case, as you are barred by your judicial restraint from deciding hypothetical cases once you are a judge, but since I suppose in all technicalities you are not one yet.

How would you consider a case, may not even having to announce how you would rule, but what would you think of a case, where the General Assembly passes a law that, in some sense interferes with the Executive branch of our government, by over-riding any veto the Premier may attach to it. Then the premier uses his power of Executive Order to exempt agencies under his control from the General Assemblies act. The GA, then takes the Premier to court for violating the law of the land, how do you foresee such a case unfolding?
avatar
Serenel

Posts : 469
Join date : 2011-02-13
Age : 28
Location : Maryland

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Supreme Court Nomination: Chief Justice

Post  Architektonikon on Tue Mar 15, 2011 11:28 am

Q: Do you ever think it would be acceptable, when in determining a case to apply real life examples, which may go with the scenario perfectly, to a situation arising in our region?

This has the potential to be a very sticky question. 'Sticky' in that it must be answered perfectly without compromising my integrity as being a judge without 'acute bias'. So, if my answer appears to violate this condition, let me know and I will clarify so as to not appear to have such a bias. This being said, I do find it acceptable to use real life situations as justification, yet this must be qualified. If by real life situations we are talking about, e.g., this is what US president X did in this situation (therefore, we should do the same), then no. In this example, the reasoning is an appeal to authority, which also functions negatively, e.g., the NAZIs did it so we must not. Both are fallacious. I, nevertheless, find arguing by analogy or with hypothetical situation to be valid reasoning. As for hypotheticals, I find them necessary to foresee the consequences of a particular piece of legislature. Put more simply, one has to think hypothetically when thinking of the future. Yet, I am fully aware one must be cautious about hypotheticals. It can be easy for them to turn into slippery slope arguments: for example, if X, then Y; if Y, then Z, if Z, then A. If we pass this law X then it will lead to A. A is awful, therefore we must not pass X. This example is a perfect (although abstract) example of the slippery slope fallacy. As for using arguments analogy to the real world, I find no problem with this insofar as they do not contain biases or any of the above or other fallacious reasoning. If the real life supreme court, for instance, has faced the same issue. If they have very good reasons and arguments for why they turned something down (which I agree with), I see no problem with using their arguments by analogy. The same goes with possible consequences which have arose out of real life circumstances and thought experiments. This is my answer. If you want more or something to be further explained let me know.

As for your example case, in order to make a steadfast ruling, I would require all the case details and specifics. Yet, my quick and improperly informed (since I lack the case details) decision, would be that the GA cannot reduce the power of the Executive branch, since the position stands as a crucial linchpin in the checks and balances of the gov. Hence, the premier should take the GA to court first, or if not, counter and take the GA to court as well. Since the GA law was unconstitutional in the first place, this would nullify all action there after.

I can talk more about this if you want. It is just hard to answer because I am just trying to imagine what you had in mind. But, prima facie, that is how I would rule (hypothetically).
avatar
Architektonikon

Posts : 58
Join date : 2011-01-26
Location : Canada

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Supreme Court Nomination: Chief Justice

Post  Serenel on Tue Mar 15, 2011 7:01 pm

Thank you Arch, if i may call you that.

for your very well thought out, and timely reply.

I further would ask:

concerning your answer that came along from my question about the GA and Premier's disput.

when you state:

"GA cannot reduce the power of the Executive branch, since the position stands as a crucial linchpin in the checks and balances of the gov"

I have a very simple, some may even call 'softball' question, what logical sequence do you use to derive at this solution? (i.e from some contruct of democracy as thought of by real life examples and experiences, or by the constitution as laied out in our region, or a combination of both?)

also, another hypothetical i have, is that a Civilian petitions the court to hear his case.

he believes he should be considered a Citizen, and does not know why the admin's of forum have not granted him such a privilage.

how would you handle the petition?
avatar
Serenel

Posts : 469
Join date : 2011-02-13
Age : 28
Location : Maryland

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Supreme Court Nomination: Chief Justice

Post  Architektonikon on Tue Mar 15, 2011 8:17 pm

Arch is fine. There is no reason to type it all out. I do not quite know what you mean by 'logical sequence', but I used the terminology of the real life constitutions because the establishment of our own individual branches of gov. mirror RL constitutions in this respect (if we are understanding what that phrase means the same way). In official rulings I will be sure to be as clear as possible (if I have not been already).

As for hypothetical petition, I would point him to where in the Constitution states what is required of a nation to become a citizen of the region. If, however, the nation is being denied citizenship unconstitutionally, then it is my duty to show the GA why this nation has met the appropriate requirements and not impede others from gaining citizenship in the same way that the GA impeded this nation.
avatar
Architektonikon

Posts : 58
Join date : 2011-01-26
Location : Canada

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Supreme Court Nomination: Chief Justice

Post  Serenel on Tue Mar 15, 2011 8:28 pm

I do apologize, maybe logical sequence was the wrong turn of phrase in this instance, as i am not inquireing in some argument based form, but merely from the stance of coming to a conclusion on a set problem.

so just for clarity your reasoning would be that because real life institutions take the view of seperation of powers, and our systems seem to be very similar to RL institutions in both name an function, we could then apply RL sentiments to our governmental institutions?

and i do understand in a real ruling you would have more information and understanding, so any ruling would then there by be more clear as to the basis, but i am just trying to establish a basic framework of your very judicious mind, and in by doing so applying the weakest litmus test possible as so when/if you are confirmed by this body, you feel no unwavering feeling of having to be pinned down by these questions, nor does someone else feel like you need to do exactly what you say now, and try to hold that against you.

so i thank you for your patience in my questioning.
avatar
Serenel

Posts : 469
Join date : 2011-02-13
Age : 28
Location : Maryland

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Supreme Court Nomination: Chief Justice

Post  Architektonikon on Sat Mar 19, 2011 6:07 pm

Your quite welcome. Yes that is what I meant. (sorry I thought I already posted this)
avatar
Architektonikon

Posts : 58
Join date : 2011-01-26
Location : Canada

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Supreme Court Nomination: Chief Justice

Post  Serenel on Mon Mar 21, 2011 12:42 am

Thank you for your time Arch.

If no one post's a question, or some other sort of meaningful post within the next two days or so, this is going to the vote.
avatar
Serenel

Posts : 469
Join date : 2011-02-13
Age : 28
Location : Maryland

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Supreme Court Nomination: Chief Justice

Post  Serenel on Thu Mar 24, 2011 3:34 pm

Okay, since more then enough time has been alloted for questions, as Speaker of The General Assembly i am now taking this to vote.

the poll can be found here
avatar
Serenel

Posts : 469
Join date : 2011-02-13
Age : 28
Location : Maryland

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Supreme Court Nomination: Chief Justice

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum