|
Emperor: Vulturret[NS] Prince of the First Rank: Sithis[NS] Imperial Council: Grand Councillor: Madeline[NS] Internal Affairs: Xemt[NS] Communications: Vulturret[NS] World Assembly Affairs: Manson [NS] External Affairs: Samsonyte[NS] Citizens' Assembly Officials: Speaker: McMannia Whitehall[NS] Imperial Justiciars: Chief Justiciar: Aav VerinHall[NS] Associate Justiciar: Smith VerinGuard[NS] Associate Justiciar: Zaphkael[NS] Imperial War Command: Fleet Admiral: Scottie[NS] Admiral: Samsonyte[NS] Admiral: Sithis[NS] Admiral: McMannia Whitehall[NS] |
|
~ Diplomatic Application ~ ~ Armada Enlistment Application ~ ~ Discord Server ~ ~ The Constitution and Criminal Code ~ |
| Welcome to Ragerian Imperium. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Assembly Procedures Act: Judicial Review | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jul 7 2018, 04:01 AM (31 Views) | |
| The Honorable Aav Verinhall | Jul 7 2018, 04:01 AM Post #1 |
|
Chief Justicar
|
The High Court of the Ragerian Imperium Question: Does the Assembly Procedures edict allow the exercise of powers not expressly delegated by the act? Overview: The Assembly Procedures Act was edicted into law on April 27th, 2018 to provide procedures for the functioning of rhe assembly. However, said act only expressly delegated a few powers. Assembly Member Caesar motioned to remove several bills from the floor. The question being considered is whether Assembly Member Caesar has the power to do so based on the act itself not expressly delegating said authority. As the act does not have a powers reservation clause, and neither does the constitution, does a citizen have the legal authority to do such an action, and if so, what are the limits on said action. Public Comment/Amicus Curae: The public comment period shall close at midnight, July 15. After such period, the court shall deliever opinions, and in the case of a dissenting opinion, deliever each separately. Declaration of Judicial Independence: No Justiciar shall answer questions as to their opinion on the case until such time as the review is over. Let the comment period begin. |
![]() |
|
| Madeline | Jul 7 2018, 06:23 AM Post #2 |
|
If you want to be literal, his motion for removal is actually a motion to vote to remove it. A vote is a vote. The end. Edited by Madeline, Jul 7 2018, 06:23 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Caesar | Yesterday, 10:52 PM Post #3 |
|
Deputy Grand Councillor
|
Unless a law says that a citizen cannot do something, it is an implied power. I myself throughout my stay in many regions know the danger of implied powers and see it now as it has our own Court up in arms asking questions it should already know. Motioning to remove a piece of legislation is common practice and should have already been defined in the procedures. Do not penalize me and the citizenry for poor writing and legal negligence on your part. I also find this review being started by a Chief Justiciar of all people to be one of the many signs of corruption as you have pointed toward in your "notice" post in the Assembly. Judicial reviews of legality are not defined in Article IV of the Constitution nor the Court Procedures Act and thus are an implied power you are extending personally over me to question my use of an implied power. I would "review" your own conduct as a head of a government branch before a real suit is filed.
Edited by Caesar, Today, 12:15 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · The Courtroom · Next Topic » |





12:29 AM Jul 11