Jerusalemcar5 v. Atlasia (I think, not sure of the correct title)

[TomC]

OK- I'll get with the other justices and discuss the potential case. I believe Colin may be out of town, so that may slow things down. Hopefully not too much.

[TomC]

Emsworth and I decided to hear the case. I believe, based on past cases, the defendant is the Senate of Atlasia. I'll open a thread. Actually, let's just continue here.

[TomC]

I have two questions. First, to the plaintiff, so you are to have us believe that Speed of Sound should be counted in the number in determining the composition of the Senate for voting purposes even though he hasn't taken the oath which grants him the power to vote? I'm not convinved that these are mutually exclusive- gaining the power to vote and being counted in the number of possible voters. Are you claiming there is no relationship there?

To the defendant, I ask, is it constitutionally relevant that during the original vote and at the opening of the override vote, there were ten senators in office?

[TomC]

I don't have a problem with that. Any objectiions?

[TomC]

The question before this court rests upon the issue of when does a person become a Senator and thus a part of "its number".

The Constitution itself lends credence to the proposition that a Senator need not be sworn to be counted as part of its number.  The first sentence of Article I Section 3 Clause 2 reads, "The Senate shall have fulfilled a quorum if a majority of its members are capable of discharging their offices and sworn into office."  This clearly implies that membership in the Senate can be held prior to the required swearing of the oath.

I read this the other way. That to  constitute a quorum, a majority of senators must be sworn in; implying that you must be sworn in to be counted as a voting senator. It implies if only four senators have sworn themselves in, you could not have a quorum, but if eight senators have sworn themselves in, you could achieve a quorum. I realize we aren't talking about a quorum here, but what constitutes a 2/3rds majority. However, it seems being sworn in is a part of figuring out the "number" of the Senate, doesn't it?

[TomC]

There is no written rule that says The PPT must wait for an appointed senator to swear himself in and take office. While some may be of the opinion that it would have been polite to do so, I see no rule that says he has to wait.

EDIT: not a ruling on whether or not SoS counted in the number at 4:16, just a reiteration of what Emsworth said about Jcar's stunt accusation.