Wolfentoad Memorial Liberal Courthouse, Pacific Justice Bacon King Presiding

[Bacon King]

As the DECIDER OF ALL of the Pacific Region, this thread shall serve as my office.

Here is the portion of the Third Pacific Constitution from which my power is derived:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Bacon King]

LIBERAL COURT JUDGEMENT BK0001: In re "The New Protect Our Forests Act"

I. "The New Protect Our Forests Act" states, in part:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Later sections of the law direct the Pacific government tp either sell the seized property or to retain it indefinitely as a preserve, depending on its acreage.

II. The Pacific Constitution states, in Article II, Section 2, Clause 12:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The aforementioned law requires private property to be taken for public use (income from the subsequent property sale or the use as a nature preserve) without any compensation.


IT IS DECIDED:

The clause of the law pertaining to property seizure are hereby rendered void due to their unconstitutionality. The Pacific Region is hereby ordered to immediately cease and desist all land seizures pursuant to this provision. Furthermore, the Pacific Region shall immediately return all such property to its original owner, or where already resold, the original owner shall be compensated at full market value for the property.

BACON KING, THE PACIFIC JUSTICE OF THE LIBERAL COURT, THE DECIDER OF ALL

[Bacon King]

That is correct!

[Bacon King]

FYI, the Voting Booth for the Special Election must be opened Noon Central Time November 7th.

Article IV specifies that elections should begin at noon Pacific Time so the booth opens in 19 minutes. Nevertheless, it's up now

[Bacon King]

notice: due to an unexpectedly busy work schedule (I had to work two shifts yesterday to cover someone having a baby and then I came home and went to sleep and now I'm waking up and about to go back to work) I'll be unable to certify the vote until about twelve hours from now. I apologize for the inconvenience.

[Bacon King]

NEW SPECIAL ELECTION FOR GOVERNOR WILL BE HELD STARTING AT NOON PACIFIC TIME ON FRIDAY THE FIFTEENTH.

[Bacon King]

NEW SPECIAL ELECTION FOR GOVERNOR WILL BE HELD STARTING AT NOON PACIFIC TIME ON FRIDAY THE FIFTEENTH.

LIBERAL COURT JUDGEMENT BK0003:

The administrator opened the booth an hour late so as PACIFIC JUSTICE OF THE LIBERAL COURT, DECIDER OF ALL I hereby proclaim an injunction to keep the booth open an hour longer than it normally would've been (so it will still be open for 72 hours).

[Bacon King]

bump

[Bacon King]

IN RE PROJECT MANAGER OF OPERATION SAVE THE PACIFIC (BK0007)

I. President Duke has appointed Supreme Court Justice Oakvale to be Project Manager of Operation Save the Pacific, to have special authority as determined by the Senate.

II. The ongoing regional crisis is continuing to infringe upon Pacific citizens' rights to a capable and effective government. In addition, the economic damage that would come from failing to qualify for offered stimulus funds would place significant economic hardship on many Pacificans; this financial burden would unduly hinder their abilities to make their own choices in life, which is specifically enumerated in the Pacific Bill of Rights.

III. However, there is an issue of Federalism at hand. To adhere to the Federal constitution, The authority Oakvale is to have over the Pacific must ultimately originate within the regional government.

IT IS DECIDED:

1. The Pacific Region in its entirety is hereby placed in an indefinite State of Emergency.

2. For the duration of this state of Emergency, a Special Project Manager as appointed by the President shall have full authority to act in any manner he deems most effective to promote the recovery of the Pacific Region.

2.a. Justice Oakvale is recognized as currently appointed Special Project Manager.
2.b. Special Project Manager shall not be an Office of Government for the Federal Dual Office Clause.

3. The Special Project Manager shall have Executive Order authority equal to the Governor's for the duration of the state of Emergency, and may temporarily void, nullify, and amend any regional law, executive order, statute, or Constitutional provision found in the first four articles of the Pacific Constitution.

4. For any actions to become permanent beyond the cessation of the State of Emergency, they must be ratified into law by proper Constitutional procedure no later than fifteen days following the end of the State of Emergency.

5. During the State of Emergency, the authority of the Special Project Manager shall only be limited by: Federal law, Federal executive order, or judicial order.

6. The State of Emergency shall be ended only by: Senate resolution, Federal executive order, judicial order, or a unanimous act of the Pacific Council signed by the Pacific Governor.

IT IS RESOLVED,

BACON KINGMAN, PACIFIC JUSTICE OF THE LIBERAL COURT, THE DECIDER OF ALL

[Bacon King]

NOTICE: In approximately 72 hours and 8 minutes an election shall commence, starting at 10 PM Forum Time on June 30th. Due to statutory limitations, candidates must declare by 7 AM Forum Time on June 30th because I have to open the voting booth by that time (I will keep it locked until the election begins).

Given my lax case load as of late I haven't been paying very close attention every day; in the future I request a PM for a much more rapid response

[Bacon King]

I have concerns that the Pacific Judicial Reform Act is in direct conflict with the Regional Constitution:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

and this is from Article V of the Constitution:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The establishment of a lower court with primary jurisdiction arguably contravene's Section 2's requirement that the "Justice shall.. arbitrate in all disputes of a legal nature that occur within the Pacific" and I find nothing in the Constitution that allows the Pacific Council to create lower courts.

I would appreciate input on this before I move forward with a potential judgement, especially since it is related to the power I currently hold and I would appreciate there be no appearance of a conflict of interest.

[Bacon King]

I am at present uncertain of the exact extent of the governor's executive power authority and Constitutionally if someone wishes to contest the legitimacy of its use here I will dutifully begin proceedings, but absent that occurring I believe this is sufficient for now

Executive Order 08-03

The Office of the Recovery is directed to suspend the Superior Court Act of 2014, as a result of the concerns raised by the Pacific Justice. I will decide, with input from various persons, whether the situation is best served by a constitutional amendment or the maintenance of the present arrangement.

[Bacon King]

IN RE IN RE OPERATION SAVE THE PACIFIC (BK0008)

1. By the unanimous agreement of the Pacific Council the State of Emergency and all Emergency Powers stated in ruling BK0007 are acknowledged to have ended.
2. This ruling should not be construed to invalidate any prior actions related to Section 5 or 6 of that ruling, but merely a statement of fact that the prior ruling is no longer operative.
3. This ruling should not be construed to have any bearing on the existence or legality of any other state of emergency the Pacific may or may not be under currently and/or any that the Governor of the Pacific currently considers it to be under.

[Bacon King]

The federal government could request an injunction on the judicial matter pending review if this court would accept that. There's this matter and the recent matter in the Mideast where proper procedure was clearly not followed in the appointment of a Senator, but it depends upon whether the federal government's concern is valid or not, and I don't see why it wouldn't be, but it is the justice's call.

Which matter are you referring to? If it's the "Operation Save the Pacific" stuff I'm fairly certain that my acknowledgement of the council's action is an entirely moot point; I distinctly recall Oakvale ending the state of emergency under the terms of sections 5/6 of the original decision but I'm unable to locate whichever thread it was buried in.

Nevertheless I welcome any legal challenges or queries on any topic, if you affirm your desire for the commencement of a formal case and specify the subject(s) that will be under scrutiny, I'll gladly commence the proceedings posthaste

[Bacon King]

IN RE EXECUTIVE ORDERS 10-05, 10-06, 10-07 (BK0009)

This case is to determine the legality and constitutionality of three executive orders recently issued by Governor Simfan.


10-05

Executive Order 10-05

A curfew is imposed from 11:30pm to 4:30am, local time, for all but essential personnel. People are advised to stay in their homes until 4:30am Saturday morning, 10/4.

Organised or politcally-motivated gatherings of 6 or more persons in public areas are prohibited until further notice.

Forcing people indoors before certain hours, and limiting gatherings in public areas? This is in blatant violation of the Pacific Constitution:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It also violates the Federal Constitution:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

10-06

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Again, this sounds pretty unconstitutional to me:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You might be able to argue that this martial law was for a "public rebellion" or something something "public safety" but consider that those exceptions in the Pacific Constitution are still required to be consistent with the Law. "Law" includes the Federal Constitution that says it can only be done when Habeas Corpus has been lawfully suspended. The Federal Constitution also says that only the Senate has the authority to do so. Ergo, no martial law.

The Federal Constitution also says the President is the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces, meaning you can't be ordering Federal units around. Furthermore, it also says "Regional authorities shall be bound by the the federal Constitution and federal laws" which includes the laws related to the proper way to dismiss the Attorney General, so you can't do that with an executive order either.

Also you can't give me authority that the regional constitution doesn't already grant to me so that's just right out as well


10-07

Executive Order 10-07

All sporting, musical, social, and other large events with more than 100 spectators are hereby ordered postponed until further notice and the lifting of martial law. Martial law shall be lifted once the legal state of the government is clarified.

Nope, can't do that. As I clarified earlier you can't infringe on the freedom of assembly and you can't declare martial law.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You can not usurp the authority of the Commander in Chief from the President. Your action also contravenes the explicit powers of the Senate pertaining to the militia, armed forces, dealing with insurrection, etc.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No if you can't have martial law in your own region there's no way you would be allowed to institute it in another region.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There is no sitting SOIA so this is irrelevant


ALL THREE OF THESE EXECUTIVE ORDERS ARE HEREBY OVERTURNED IN FULL. Every single line is blatantly and explicitly unconstitutional for the reasons stated above. Effective immediately, these orders are not in effect. This ruling is temporary for the next twenty four (24) hours, during which time the Governor or any other party may object to this preliminary judgement.

IT IS DECIDED

-BK

[Bacon King]

I damn well object!

Please make your case

[Bacon King]

Ok. I think some of your restrictions are a little harsh but I'm going to allow this one. I don't particularly care to get into the nuances of American vs Atlasian jurisprudence. There's also the fact that there is no state of emergency from the "Patriation of the Pacific Recovery Act 2014" that is legally in existence but that's insubstantial to the rest of it.

Here's how let's do this k? Your new executive order more or less adhered to my previous case so I'm gonna go ahead and finalize that and not instigate legal action against the new one.

Verdict of BK0009 is hereby finalized

(note: my tacit acceptance of EO 10-11 here does not imply any binding legal decision nor does it preclude judicial acceptance of a public petition concerning the constitutionality of an executive order, pursuant to the Pacific Constitution)

[Bacon King]

I hereby resign from the office of Justice of the Pacific, effective immediately.