NORTHEAST Pornography and Age of Consent Act Vote

[MAS117]

The Office of Governor MAS117

After consultation with my circle of advisors and the Chief Judicial Officer of the region who ensures me while he does not agree with this action, it is in fact legal, and by the power invested in me by Article IV, Section III of the Northeastern Constitution, I hereby excerise my right to use the Line Item Veto and Veto section Section II, Clause I of the Northeast Pornography and Age of Consent Act, while I sign into law the rest of the Act.


x Governor MAS117


My reason for vetoed said clause of this act, is because it is very contradictory as pointed out by SCOTUS Chief Justice KEmperor of New York. Why would we say "All those persons of 16 years of age or older not incarcerated for crimes shall have the right to give consent to engage in sexual acts with other persons of 16 years of age or older." and then come back and say later on "Any person of 16 years of age or older who engages in a sexual act with a person of 12 years of age or younger is guilty of statutory rape." As you know no clause in a act supercedes another clause, therefore this is contradictory, and that is my explaination into the use of the Line Item Veto. Thank you.

[MAS117]

Ummmm... Don't sections 2 and 3 contradict each other?  2 says that all persons 16 years or older are permitted, with all people.  Section 3 then says that any person 21 years of age, engaging in sexual activity with any person younger than 17 is breaking the law.

They do, which is why I vetoed it.

[MAS117]

Ummmm... Don't sections 2 and 3 contradict each other?  2 says that all persons 16 years or older are permitted, with all people.  Section 3 then says that any person 21 years of age, engaging in sexual activity with any person younger than 17 is breaking the law.

They do, which is why I vetoed it.

Oh, I thought you signed it.  Well done, govnah

Just read my damn statement Super, lol.

[MAS117]

A line item veto for non-tax/spending provisions of a bill? Thats got to be the most expansive set of powers given to an executive outside of the dictatorships.

I've actually checked the Northeast Constitution and this "Line Item Veto" is in fact a fiction.

The constitution of the Northeast is rather vague and does not give specific veto powers that the Governor has or does not have. I checked with the Chief Judicial Officer of the region and he concurred with my findings.

[MAS117]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Of course the above section implies a line item veto.

If people can't be bothered to read the laws they are voting on, then it does not excuse suspending the rule of law.

I did in fact read it, when I made the rulling, although I do not remember seeing the word "legislation" being used. This may change my opinion. If you really feel strongly about the case, feel free to open a case, and I will reveiw it.

To my knowledge the case has to brought upon by a citizen of the Northeast region.

[MAS117]

Well I obviously know that this is beyond my scope as a non-resident.

I encourage a citizen to put an end to this madness as this precedent is dangerous for democracy.

Peter for some reason I am not quite catching on to what your tryingn to say here. What are you trying to say? That it was illegal for me to excerise the line item veto?

[MAS117]

There needs to be a constitutional amendment regarding veto powers and exceutive powers. Earl and King, can we get a move on for the constitution?

[MAS117]

If you want to put a halt on this case for about a week or so, we can have this as the first case for the newly appointed Chief Judicial Officer/Judge of the Northeast, depending a vote on the Constitutional Amendment.