Public Discussion on the Supreme Court Cases (Avoid Cluttering Case Threads)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I'm honestly very puzzled by all this. Everyone complains when people don't do anything - particularly do-nothing cabinet members - and yet when someone does actually start doing stuff people complain.

Because people just want to complain, period.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Just as a random comment, I do agree with Antonio about the worrying precedent that would be set by letting Xahar off, as much as I wish he would be able to serve. I just hope the court has this very very very serious precedent in mind.

I agree. We must consider that the only enforcement method is to deprive people of the right to vote and the right to serve. If a Governor posts PM's or a message log or worse hacks an account or creates a fake account to vote with, how do you punish them unless the punishments laid out in the Consolidated Justice Act apply to both Federal and Regional elections.

If Xahar is let of then there will be about 15 to 20 people in Regional Gov't that are essentially above the law.

[Purple State]

For the record, I believe people are beginning to read the Privacy Protection Act far more broadly than it was meant. It was specifically proposed to address the posting of actual correspondences, such as quoting PMs into a post or copy/pasting IMs into posts. The discussion of the content of said correspondences, without the posting of the actual content, should not be considered illegal, otherwise I could sue a few people right now.

You can only sue as Atlasia if you are the AG, I believe. Individuals don't have the right to sue through the Privacy Protection Act.

It is still upsetting to see people throwing around threats of suits for something that wassn't (as far as I was concerned when sponsoring the bill) the intention or, as far as I see, isn't the proper reading of the law.

Why don't you write up an Amicus Brief when the trial gets under way?

It depends on what the evidence actually is. bgwah could very well have perfectly legitimate cases following the intent of the laws. I won't assume anything about the cases until I see where they go.

The AG is definitely keeping the Court busy though and providing a good source of entertainment in the meantime.

[Brandon H]

Can the court and the AG handle the current work load? Might there be a need for more justices (or judges to try cases who are not actually on the court) and a deputy AG to help serve as a prosecutor?

[Marokai Backbeat]

Can the court and the AG handle the current work load? Might there be a need for more justices (or judges to try cases who are not actually on the court) and a deputy AG to help serve as a prosecutor?

Bullmoose once brainstormed the intriguing idea of expanding the amount of Justices to 5, and I liked the idea. Still do, but I'm sure people would find some sort of sinister motive in that, too.

[Purple State]

Can the court and the AG handle the current work load? Might there be a need for more justices (or judges to try cases who are not actually on the court) and a deputy AG to help serve as a prosecutor?

Bullmoose once brainstormed the intriguing idea of expanding the amount of Justices to 5, and I liked the idea. Still do, but I'm sure people would find some sort of sinister motive in that, too.

The ever-present problem is expanding the number of offices... and how you find good justices. I would instantly recommend Dibble, who has been an excellent justice for the SE. Perhaps Peter, if he were willing to jump back into things.

[minionofmidas]

We still haven't the slightest clue what Hamilton is supposed to have done. Though if that case, and Sewer's, have as little basis as the other suit bgwah has been threatening against Hamilton in that case, then it is high time this off-the-rocker pursuer of personal vendettas be stopped in the only constitutionally acceptable way. Which is impeachment. (Though it does seem there must be some substance to the Hamilton case - judging purely from Ham's behavior.)

Apologies for waiting until the trials start to post my evidence.

Well most of the time there were political trials in Atlasia (and let's face it, almost every possible trial in Atlasia is political. It's in the nature of the game) people knew what it was about... I understand that's sometimes not possible and all, but, well, it smells a little fishy. I'm perfectly ready to be convinced otherwise, of course, but this (the first Ham case) is taking pretty long. And if that unmarked semi-quote is supposed to be an offense, I guess half the people who posted in the "Rumors" thread need to be banned from voting too.

[opebo]

Can the court and the AG handle the current work load? Might there be a need for more justices (or judges to try cases who are not actually on the court) and a deputy AG to help serve as a prosecutor?

We can handle it, but it is a strain, I must confess.  At least for myself.

I would not support an increase in the number of justices, but I think that the idea of a Trial Court is an excellent one.  This way any cases appealed to us (the Supreme Court) will not have been tried by one of us.  An assistant AJ is a great idea too.

I wonder how many people think a trial court of say 1-3 justices would be a good idea?  They could be general federal trial judges or they could be assigned certain regions as their individual purview.

I apologize if it is inappropriate for a sitting justice to interject opinion in this thread, but I think we should voice our comments on practical matters such as this.

[minionofmidas]

It is a good idea, provided people can be found to fill it. [/serious part of post]

Maybe abolish the regions to free up the personnel - except the Midwest of course?

[Rowan]

Of course Marokai wants more justices now when there is a liberal in the White House.

[Franzl]

Of course Marokai wants more justices now when there is a liberal in the White House.

Do you have anything intelligent to say....ever?

[Purple State]

Can the court and the AG handle the current work load? Might there be a need for more justices (or judges to try cases who are not actually on the court) and a deputy AG to help serve as a prosecutor?

We can handle it, but it is a strain, I must confess.  At least for myself.

I would not support an increase in the number of justices, but I think that the idea of a Trial Court is an excellent one.  This way any cases appealed to us (the Supreme Court) will not have been tried by one of us.  An assistant AJ is a great idea too.

I wonder how many people think a trial court of say 1-3 justices would be a good idea?  They could be general federal trial judges or they could be assigned certain regions as their individual purview.

I apologize if it is inappropriate for a sitting justice to interject opinion in this thread, but I think we should voice our comments on practical matters such as this.

I actually think that assigning the regional judiciaries as sort of like the US Circuit Court of Appeals, but for hearing the cases from scratch, could be a very good idea.

[Purple State]

Considering the current strain on the Court, it may be wise to remand one or two cases (if this is legal) to the regional courts (such as the Southeast) to expedite the process and ensure a speedy trial.

Not sure if this is allowed though.

[Хahar 🤔]

Of course Marokai wants more justices now when there is a liberal in the White House.

Ah, Marokai, I didn't think it would be possible to turn this into a devious plot. Congratulations for calling it.

[minionofmidas]

Of course Marokai wants more justices now when there is a liberal in the White House.

Do you have anything intelligent to say....ever?

The last time he did, he got dragged into court for it. So now he's foresworn intelligent utterances.

[Sam Spade]

I'm fine with the caseload right now.

Xahar's case is tough (for me at least) - that explains the time we're taking on that one.

[bullmoose88]

I've suggested expanding the court to five. But my other idea was to have one to three federaldistrict court type judges who handle trials only. Leave the adminstrative and appellate functions to us.  It's a little weird for me to handle the appeal of a case I've tried. My two cents.

[bgwah]

I'm also fine. The amount of court cases lately is unusual anyway and will probably be returning to normal soon.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Can the court and the AG handle the current work load? Might there be a need for more justices (or judges to try cases who are not actually on the court) and a deputy AG to help serve as a prosecutor?

Bullmoose once brainstormed the intriguing idea of expanding the amount of Justices to 5, and I liked the idea. Still do, but I'm sure people would find some sort of sinister motive in that, too.

     Nah, we shouldn't be unnecessarily adding public offices.

[Rowan]

Of course Marokai wants more justices now when there is a liberal in the White House.

Do you have anything intelligent to say....ever?

This is just like when FDR tried to stack the courts.

[Хahar 🤔]

Of course Marokai wants more justices now when there is a liberal in the White House.

Do you have anything intelligent to say....ever?

This is just like when FDR tried to stack the courts.

Except that it isn't?

[Teddy (IDS Legislator)]

Well that didn't work.
Then again I'm banned from doing something I can't do for months anyway

Hopefully the law will get changed.

[MaxQue]

Well that didn't work.
Then again I'm banned from doing something I can't do for months anyway

Hopefully the law will get changed.

No, we banned de-registration for a reason.

[Purple State]

Well that didn't work.
Then again I'm banned from doing something I can't do for months anyway

Hopefully the law will get changed.

No, we banned de-registration for a reason.

Before my time. What reason?

[Teddy (IDS Legislator)]

Well that didn't work.
Then again I'm banned from doing something I can't do for months anyway

Hopefully the law will get changed.

No, we banned de-registration for a reason.

Before my time. What reason?

Someone de-registered then got voted into something.

Rather than ban voting for a de-registered person, they banned de-registration.