Confirmation Hearing: windjammer for Supreme Court justice

[windjammer]

Thank you Mr Vice President,

I would like to thank President Griffin for having nominated me for this position as well. This is a great honour.

For senators who don't know me, let me introduce myself. I was an active player who decided to retire from politics. I was previously Midwest Governor, Mideast Governor, representative, Lieutenant Governor, Senator, Senate Speaker and Vice President .  I know and understand the game very well. I know as well how the court works. I participated in many court cases relating to the constitutionality of a law or a criminal trial.  So why confirming me? Because I have experience. I will be an active Associate Justice and will fulfill all my duties if confirmed by the senate.

I'm available for any question or concern you might have.

Regards,
Windjammer

What is the nominee's opinion of this article?

http://www.r-word.org/r-word-effects-of-the-word.aspx

This article isn't related to this game so I don't understand what the question is? No one will ever fill a lawsuit about this article.

[windjammer]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Honestly, I quite agree with South Park on this question (S19E8). People should focus on improving the lives of people who have disabilities instead of creating artificial debates about using a word.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I have not been nominated for "the most popular office". My job is to make sure that the consititution is respected. I don't understand why having my personal opinion about the word "retarded" matters. So yes, I didn't understand your question.
I have people with disabilities in my family, when I was in high school I managed to convince the board of directors to finally make the high school comply with the european norms about people having disabilities. With my effort, the high school became more accessible to them. So I have never been against people with disabilities, I have fought for them.

Do you still oppose a universal, absolute right to free speech?

Article VI Clause 1:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

My view on free speech is basically the same than the current US Supreme Court. People can write anything they want. They can freely assemble as well. The right of free speech is mostly unlimited. There are however few limits:
-child pornography
- imminent lawless action: murder etc,...
And I agree with the Supreme Court on this matter because guaranteeing the security of the People is a constitutional duty as well.

However, I would have agreed with the Supreme Court in Snyder vs Phelps, even if the actions of the Westboro Church were deeply homophobic, it was protected by the right of free speech and wasn't dangerous.

[windjammer]

Having had the opportunity to work with Windjammer as Mideast Speaker this past spring, I know him to be a consistently active, independent, and competent public servant. I will be voting for confirmation.

Thank you Senator

[windjammer]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, thank you . I'm glad to have someone who is asking questions hehe .

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, that's quite a long question .
The question about any lawsuit against myself, well, I would simply recuse myself, for fairness. Justices have to recuse themselves when a lawsuit is brought against themselves. And I find that normal.
Regarding Snowstalker vs the Midwest, I would like to remind everyone I was the attorney defending the law, not the judge. I believed that the only way that could avoid the law being striken down would be to try to convince the judge that the current definition of free speech didn't include the right of people to say offensive comments like homophobia,... Let me be clear, I knew since the beginning this law was going to be struck down, but I just wanted to defend this law because it was my duty to do so as governor.
Then, my personal views relating to the freedom of speech is that offensive comments like homophobic, racist comments shouldn't be allowed. But my personal views simply don't matter. As a judge, I have to make sure the constitution is respected, no matter what my personal views are.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In the past, I indeed clashed with many people. But this is a game and I don't hold a grudge against anyone. If I believe there could be a problem with my "personal feelings", I would recuse myself.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Will, it has already been done, I'm no longer involved in the game except for the constitutional convention, which is hardly a partisan issue . I don't plan to run for any office as a member of the Supreme Court.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't like at all term limits for elected officeholders. I believe people should have the right to reelect their representative if they want to do so. For the Supreme Court, my opinion on possible term-limits is much more conflicted because Judges aren't elected, they are appointed. So I'm not sure if there should be term-limits for the Supreme Court or not.
I won't be indefinitely a member of the Supreme Court, I can guarantee that. So I guess I will impose myself term-limits without knowing how much time I want to remain in the court?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, I'm personally a regionalist and I have been a strong supporter of reducing the number of regions in order to save the regional system. I believe regions and the federal government should be able to coexist. For the last question, it will simply depend about the case I guess. If for example the federal government passes a law that wants to regulate the elections at regional levels, I will personally rule that this is unconstitutional because the constitution is clear about that: the regions can govern themselves and their elections as they wish. However, if the regions are trying to raise an army in time of peace without the consent of the senate, I believe this is unconstitutional as well because the regions cannot maintain armed forced in time of peace without the consent of the senate.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The role of the Supreme Court is to make sure the constitution is respected, not to show compassion.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is simply really important. Supreme Court decision-making shouldn't be constantly overturned because members of the court change. The role of the members of the Supreme Court is to make sure the constitution is respected, not what according to us the constitution should have been.



I hope I have answered to all of your questions, if you want to know anything else, please let me know .

[windjammer]

Mr. Windjammer, I have a question about activity. The Supreme court is not constantly engage but at points the demands on it can be rather intensive. If I recall correctly you did not vote in December and at points you have had periods of inactivity. Can you assure the Senate that you will be an active and able Supreme Court Justice?

Yes, I will be active.

[windjammer]

The nominee has my support.

Windjammer has been an active and capable office holder in the past. I'm sure he'll do a really great job by making sure the Constitution is respected. He already did that in the Senate.

I'll vote to confirm the nominee.

Thank you for your answers. This is a qualified and capable nominee.

Thank you all

Mr. Windjammer, I have a question about activity. The Supreme court is not constantly engage but at points the demands on it can be rather intensive. If I recall correctly you did not vote in December and at points you have had periods of inactivity. Can you assure the Senate that you will be an active and able Supreme Court Justice?

Yes, I will be active. If I realize I can't be active for any irl reasons, I will resign.

[windjammer]

Thank you all for your support.

[windjammer]

Literally astounded, lads. Literally astounded.

How quickly they forget.

How quickly I forgot you

Literally astounded, lads. Literally astounded.

How quickly they forget.

Right? This was easily the most absurdly lax confirmation hearing for a Supreme Court Justice I've ever seen. A few broad questions on legal principles and some political ones (?) - not a single detailed analysis of a case - and then the cuckaus votes to confirm overwhelmingly - I'm seeing a pattern! Better off out of it, I think.

From someone who wanted to destroy this and deregistered, you seem to care so much about this game.

[windjammer]

Just saw Windjammer is staying in the Labor Party and voted in the primary - very disappointed to see that Justice Windjammer has already gone against his promise to stay out of politics.

When I was saying that, I wanted to say that I wasn't going to try to influence how the laws were made because I didn't want to constantly recuse myself from courtcase. It is silly to believe I would have totally stopped voting. If I don't vote anymore, I would finally be deregistered. I just voted in a primary, I didn't even publicly support anyone. I don't see where is the wrongdoing.
This is so strange to see how much you are concerned about the fact that I'm still in the Labor Party. I mean, Justice TJ is still a member of the Federalist Party.
Oh and no need to remind everyone that my predecessor basically was a chairman of a party, gave his opinion about many laws during senate discussions, and that didn't bother anyone.

I think I need to explain what were Tmthforu's true motives. Tmthforu basically threatened him by PM. He told me that if I didn't delete my vote in the Labor primaries, he would expose myself publicly. When I asked him if it was blackmail what he was trying to do, he posted this message.
Tmthforu basically tried to influence the Labor Party primaries by threatening me and trying to make me delete my vote. (no need to remind everyone that he has clashed with Griffin recently). I can't post the PMs publicly because of the rules of this forum, but that was basically that.

Oh and the idea you seem to imply that Griffin nominated me in order to get my vote for the primaries is laughable because he nominated me way before Blair even started his campaign.

[windjammer]

You PMed me, telling me that I shouldn't be involved in the Labor Primary at all. Then, you told me that I didn't correct that, you were going to expose me publicly.

So I'm not lying.