Office of Northeast Chief Judicial Officer cinyc

[Napoleon]

Welcome back! He was already Governor.

[Cincinnatus]

Cinyc is back!  We were staring to get worried

[Lincoln Republican]

Northeast Chief Judicial Officer cinyc, please give us the judiciall ruling on the following matter.

In other words, is the election of homelycooking as Speaker legal?

Thank you.

Quote from: La cucina brutta on Today at 10:24:39 pm
Winfield, Cincinnatus, Napoleon, I appreciate your desire to keep this session moving forward, but I see this in the Northeast Assembly Speaker Act and worry that my assuming the job of Speaker is not legal.


Quote
The Northeast Assembly shall elect a Speaker from among its members by a majority vote of all members of the Northeast Assembly at the start of each new Northeast Assembly term.


I received 50% of the vote, as did Wormyguy. Neither of us attained a majority, unless Winfield claims that he is a member of the Assembly as well.

I'm sorry, but I only want the proper procedure to be followed, and I don't want to be an illegal Speaker.



I would interpret "all members of the Northeast Assembly" to mean all members present at the time of the vote.  All members had ample notice of the vote for Speaker.  As you see, the Northeast Assembly has never had all elected members present, and has Redocmmander even sworn in?

In the event of a tie, the Lieutenant Governor casts the tie breaking vote.  As Governor, in the absence a Lieutenant Governor, I was acting, constitutionally, in the capacity of the Lieutenant Governor, to break the tie.

Anyway, I shall take this matter up with the Northeast Chief Judicial Officer.

Article IV, Section xiv of the New Northeast Constitution states that the Lt. Governor "does not take part in any vote in the Legislative Assembly unless a vote results in a perfect tie. In this case, he or she shall be allowed to vote to break said tie."  Thus, if the vote for speaker ended up in a tie, the Lt. Governor is entitled to break it.   If Winfield was Lt. Governor and not Governor at the time of the vote, his vote should count to break the tie.  

Note that I haven't yet rendered my opinion on whether the Governor is entitled to break a tie in other than the temporary absence of the Lt. Governor or when such a temporary absence would actually occur.  So if Governor Winfield was actually Governor at the time of the tie-breaking, the result might differ.   Please provide more actual facts.

I was Govenor at the time.  The fact of the matter  is that we had no Lieutenant Goveror at the time.  The office of Lieutenant Governor was vacant.  So, in that sense, there was an absence of the Lieutenant Governor.  The ties had to be broken, so, as Govenor, who has the constitutional authority to fill in for the Lieutenant Governor when there is an absence of the Lieutenant Governor, I cast the tie breaking votes.

     

[cinyc]

Then we're back in the Article IV, Section xiii conundrum.  That provision states:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The temporariness of the absence matters.  How long after the Lt. Governor left his post did this vote occur?  When was the election to fill the vacancy held?  And how do you reconcile that constitutional provision with the lack of a specific reference to the Governor's ability to break ties in the absence of the Lt. Governor under Article VI, section xiv?

[cinyc]

I repeat my question for Governor Winfield or whomever wants to answer it:

Then we're back in the Article IV, Section xiii conundrum.  That provision states:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The temporariness of the absence matters.  How long after the Lt. Governor left his post did this vote occur?  When was the election to fill the vacancy held?  And how do you reconcile that constitutional provision with the lack of a specific reference to the Governor's ability to break ties in the absence of the Lt. Governor under Article VI, section xiv?

[Lincoln Republican]

You were away for about a month apparently.

I asked you on more than occasion, I believe, to make a ruling.

You failed to do so.

I made a decision, which I believe is the right one.  I was backed by Senator Napoleon and most of the Assembly.

You are now asking all these questions, which should have been asked long ago.

I posted a response on August 1, 2011 which I believe would have sufficed.

[Cincinnatus]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[homelycooking]

And we're back to square one again, because none of us are permitted to open a voting booth besides cinyc. The legislation I introduced to permit the Governor or Lieutenant Governor to open  a voting booth had to be withdrawn because it was constitutionally objectional.

[Napoleon]

And we're back to square one again, because none of us are permitted to open a voting booth besides cinyc. The legislation I introduced to permit the Governor or Lieutenant Governor to open  a voting booth had to be withdrawn because it was constitutionally objectional.

The Governor is already legally able to, hence our perfectly legal string of special elections.

[homelycooking]

And we're back to square one again, because none of us are permitted to open a voting booth besides cinyc. The legislation I introduced to permit the Governor or Lieutenant Governor to open  a voting booth had to be withdrawn because it was constitutionally objectional.

The Governor is already legally able to, hence our perfectly legal string of special elections.

Oh, right. Well, then, where is he?

[Cincinnatus]

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=137342.msg3042400#msg3042400