Judicial Term Limits Amendment [Failed] (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 29, 2024, 07:46:29 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  Judicial Term Limits Amendment [Failed] (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Judicial Term Limits Amendment [Failed]  (Read 12846 times)
DownWithTheLeft
downwithdaleft
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,548
Italy


Political Matrix
E: 9.16, S: -3.13

« on: August 20, 2007, 12:33:41 PM »

It sounds like a good idea, however, wouldn't that create the immediate problem of all the justices coming up at the same time considering I believe they have all been justices a year or around that.  I kind of like the idea of the bill, but I don't know if it is the best thing to do at this point.  As much as I would love to see Opebo off the court after his decision in Ernest v. Gabu regarding Defarge's vote, this might not be the best way to do it.  Reconfirmation every year might be a good idea though.
Logged
DownWithTheLeft
downwithdaleft
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,548
Italy


Political Matrix
E: 9.16, S: -3.13

« Reply #1 on: August 21, 2007, 08:12:19 AM »

It sounds like a good idea, however, wouldn't that create the immediate problem of all the justices coming up at the same time considering I believe they have all been justices a year or around that.  I kind of like the idea of the bill, but I don't know if it is the best thing to do at this point.  As much as I would love to see Opebo off the court after his decision in Ernest v. Gabu regarding Defarge's vote, this might not be the best way to do it.  Reconfirmation every year might be a good idea though.

What was wrong with that decision?  I don't remember it myself.

But please allow me to remind you wild-eyed reformers that those of us currently on the court would not be subject to your unatlasian innovation.  I for one intend to serve for life.

What was wrong with that decision?  You ruled that Defarge's vote was not invalid even though it was clear-cut that he did not meet the requirments of posts needed.  That is why I support this bill if changed, some justices proved incapable of sitting on the court.
Logged
DownWithTheLeft
downwithdaleft
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,548
Italy


Political Matrix
E: 9.16, S: -3.13

« Reply #2 on: August 22, 2007, 09:50:50 AM »

What was wrong with that decision?  You ruled that Defarge's vote was not invalid even though it was clear-cut that he did not meet the requirments of posts needed.  That is why I support this bill if changed, some justices proved incapable of sitting on the court.

"Proved incapable of sitting on the court"?  Isn't this just another way of saying you disagree with the justice?  If you disagree with a decision, you just kick the justice off the Cout?

This is precisely why we need lifetime appointments - to prevent the Court being subject to political influence.  The indepencence and impartiality of the judiciary cannot survive this onslaught.
The decision was not one that could be dissented from, it was clear-cut law.  Gabu admitted the mistake and Defarge even apoligized, and still you voted to let True Dem have the vote.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.02 seconds with 11 queries.