SENATE BILL: Judicial Tenure Amendment (Failed)

[TNF]

Aye.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Nay

[Napoleon]

No

[TJ in Oregon]

Nay

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

NAY

[bore]

Nay

[Sbane]

Nay

[Gass3268]

Nay

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Vote on Amendment 56:19 by TNF:

Aye (1): TNF
Nay (: Bore, Gass3268, HagridoftheDeep, MaxQue, Napoleon, NC Yankee, sbane and TJ in Cleve
Abstain (0):

Didn't Vote (0):
Vacant Seats (1): Kalwejt

With eight votes in the negative, the amendment has been rejected.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

So anymore amendments? I expected some on the length of the terms and so forth.

[bore]

What would everyone think about expanding the court?

[TNF]

What would everyone think about expanding the court?

I'm down.

[MaxQue]

What would everyone think about expanding the court?

I may look silly for asking the same short question a second time today, but why?
Does there is a need to expand it?

[Sbane]

I would be opposed to expanding the court. Why is that even necessary?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

There is really not enough cases to justify it and considering the fact that we have three distinguished "Conservatives" on the court right now (You'll laugh first and then realize that in some ways this isn't just sarcasm ), I don't see what could be gained from adding a fourth from a partisan perspective.

[MaxQue]

There is really not enough cases to justify it and considering the fact that we have three distinguished "Conservatives" on the court right now (You'll laugh first and then realize that in some ways this isn't just sarcasm ), I don't see what could be gained from adding a fourth from a partisan perspective.

And a fifth would be needed, since having an even number isn't a good idea.

[bore]

I'm not entirely convinced by the idea either, but the basic rationale would be you increase the number of vacancies so you have a higher turn over without the drawbacks of term limits. One of the big problems in my opinion with the court is its make up has been pretty static for a very long time- can anyone see opebo or even Ebowed leaving soon? - which is very dull because you don't have confirmation battles/ worries about who will be appointed/ speculation on nominations etc. But if you had more judges it would be far more likely for resignations/ runs for office to occur.

[Gass3268]

I'm going to have a few amendments on this Amendment, here is the first one: 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Also I ask for unanimous consent to change the title of the 2nd 3rd clause to clause 4.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

If the numeric change is in the text, it will change with the amendment. Otherwise a seperate motion would be a seperate amendment and that would be a waste of time.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: None Given
Status: Vote tomorrow unless feedback is given.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Damn it maxy!!!

[MaxQue]

What?
I'll suppose I'll accept it, since nobody objected.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Friendly
Status: Senators have 24 hours to object

[Ban my account ffs!]

While lifetime appointments to the supreme court IRL make sense as an added check and balance to a system that is mostly elected fixed-term officials, Atlasia bears little resemblance to real life in that respect.

As such, I think while this amendment proposal is in the right spirit, it does not do nearly enough to reform perhaps the least dynamic part of the game.

I think it's time for Atlasia to seriously consider major reform in the judicial branch.  This is not an attack on justices Ebowed, Bgwah, or Opebo, who have all done their duty well under the current system.

But in a game where the average term is 4 months, it is unrealistic to have lifetime appointments precisely because those appointments have not turned over in a realistic matter to the much faster time frame of the game.

My main point is completely changing the judicial branch.  Two main ideas are worth considering:

1.  A peoples or citizens court.  This court would be purposely disorganized and would demand participation from the citizenry.  This would basically be an "Althingization" of the judicial branch of the federal government.  Unlike IRL, where most "players" are not politically active or particularly involved, the citizenry of Atlasia is very tuned into the goings on.

The obvious drawback is that without a proper oversight apparatus, decisions could be made that run contrary to the law of the land.  So that would obviously need to be addressed.  But it would put the interpretation of the law into the hands of the citizenry, in whom all political power inherently rests.

2.  We dismantle the Supreme Court as it stands and appoint odd-numbered randomly selected juries to each court case.  This could be overseen by an appointed judge who presides over, but does not have the ultimate decision in the case.  In this fashion, the judge would ensure that the law of the land is followed while still allowing complainants and defendants to be judged by a jury of their peers.

In the current system, there are accusations of inequity and unfairness and personal feelings getting into the legal process because we have three justices who have absolutely no incentive not to do this.  They have enough popular support to quell impeachment proceedings, which themselves are personal and probably unfounded.

A judicial system that involves the citizenry in a relatively controlled atmosphere would ensure fairness. 

We could even incorporate the current justices into the system, where one of the three justices is picked at random to preside over cases so as to ensure fairness.

We should have a calm, collected conversation about this.  Whatever your opinion on the current judicial system, it is clear in amendments like these that serious reform is needed to bring the judicial branch in line with the other two branches of our governmental system.

Thanks.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The amendment has been adopted.


What does the sponsor and supporters think of the points made by Snowguy?

[Napoleon]

I'd tell you what I think, but I'd get in trouble.