Legislation: Federal Courts Act, 1789 (Passed) (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 26, 2024, 04:33:03 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Forum Community
  Election and History Games
  Mock Parliament (Moderators: Hash, Dereich)
  Legislation: Federal Courts Act, 1789 (Passed) (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Legislation: Federal Courts Act, 1789 (Passed)  (Read 1049 times)
wxtransit
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,106


Political Matrix
E: -0.26, S: 2.43

« on: July 09, 2018, 12:14:32 AM »

Mr. Speaker,

While I and my fellow faction members support this legislation for the most part, it is apparent that it is necessary for the honorable member from Kentucky's amendment to be passed. It is important for our highest courts to be separate from political drama, yes, but it is also just as important that the American people, through one voice or another, have a check and balance on these courts, or we shall descend into tyranny of these institutions, for it is the people which should have the final say, be it through the Assembly, if it must. A two-thirds majority of votes in this house, as noted by the honorable member from Kentucky, does provide ample protection against political ploys, due to the very polarized nature of this house, and the large number of seats required to meet the threshold.

I yield.
Logged
wxtransit
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,106


Political Matrix
E: -0.26, S: 2.43

« Reply #1 on: July 09, 2018, 08:37:57 PM »

Mr. Speaker,

I propose a compromise amendment: for a three-fourths majority of the assembly to be required to vote in favor of an overruling to undo a decision by the highest court. This amendment would ensure that no one faction or party of the people would be able to overturn a ruling alone, as it is improbable to believe that a caucus could garner such support in a free and fair election, of which I hope we can continue for the sake of our liberty. This, however, would also ensure that the people, albeit through indirect means, would still have a say in these most important rulings.

I and my colleagues do believe it offensive for the Tories to claim that these justices must be above the rule of the people, that the unified voice of our constituents should be disregarded by the iron rule of some few, much like the monarchy of our days past. In this grand experiment, we have pursued this first and foremost for the vision of the people, not a select few.

Our misgivings aside, we do hope that the Tory faction will come to support this compromise, as it is clear the large majority of the rest of the opposition and government do stand in favor of this judiciary but with a check by the people, not through absolute rule. We are coming to the table to cooperate for the people, and we hope our colleagues in the opposition do stand with us also to unify this nation.

I yield the remainder of my time.
Logged
wxtransit
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,106


Political Matrix
E: -0.26, S: 2.43

« Reply #2 on: July 09, 2018, 09:32:48 PM »

Mr. Speaker,

Given that the honorable member from New York City & Westchester has had a reversal of position on the two-thirds amendment, I withdraw my compromise amendment from consideration. Additionally, I would like to speak in support of the honorable member from Pennsylvania's proposition to have a judiciary which is free from other political office, to ensure that these justices are free from partisan politics.

I yield the remainder of my time.
Logged
wxtransit
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,106


Political Matrix
E: -0.26, S: 2.43

« Reply #3 on: July 09, 2018, 09:43:38 PM »

Mr. Speaker,

After a humorous exchange, I now reintroduce my compromise amendment, and hope that the honorable member from New York City & Westchester can next time state his intentions in a more clear sense. Furthermore, we in the government still implore the Tory faction to join with the rest of the Assembly in approving this amendment, as it would be obstruction to not only prevent the will of the majority against the minority, but also to prevent the will of the American people in these most important cases.

I yield.
Logged
wxtransit
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,106


Political Matrix
E: -0.26, S: 2.43

« Reply #4 on: July 10, 2018, 03:11:22 PM »

Mr. Speaker,

I submit a petition to override the decision of the honorable member from New York City and Westchester's decision on the three-fourths amendment. As demonstrated by the resolve of not only the government, but also the Leader of the Opposition and a member of the honorable member from New York City and Westchester's own party, the National Assembly save for one would like to see this bill passed with this amendment added as a check for the people.

Mr. Speaker, I implore you to not allow the decision of one singular Deputy to nullify the unified decision of the rest of the Assembly, or we shall resort to such a tyrannical nature as of a monarchy. You must allow this amendment to be passed, or at least open a vote on the amendment, as it is clearly the will of the people to do so.

I yield the remainder of my time.

Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.028 seconds with 13 queries.