Supreme Court Ruling: Fritz vs. Ernest (MAJOR CONSTITUTIONAL DECISION!) (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 18, 2024, 04:34:54 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  Supreme Court Ruling: Fritz vs. Ernest (MAJOR CONSTITUTIONAL DECISION!) (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Supreme Court Ruling: Fritz vs. Ernest (MAJOR CONSTITUTIONAL DECISION!)  (Read 5127 times)
Fritz
JLD
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,668
United States


« on: November 04, 2004, 07:55:26 AM »

This is the most ridiculous ruling ever made.  The court has just ruled that the Senate has no authority to make law whatsoever, and has set up Governors as virtual dictators of each region- apparantly able to make legally binding declarations without so much as calling for a vote among the citizens, as Ernest has done.  This undermines the entire fantasy election government process.  Laws passed by the Senate are nothing more than "suggestions"?  Governors can decide whether or not any law is valid in their region?   I am sorry, but even in the broadest interpretation of the constitution I fail to see how this conclusion is reached.

My region may soon be without a governor, but perhaps that will be a good thing.  Better to have anarchy than dictatorship.

The entire Supreme Court ought to be impeached, under Article III clause 3 of the Constitution, for usurping the Senate's lawmaking authority.  I call upon the Senate to reclaim its rightful position as the lawmaking authority in Atlasia by beginning impeachment proceedings against Justices KEmporer, Demrepdan, and King.
Logged
Fritz
JLD
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,668
United States


« Reply #1 on: November 05, 2004, 01:24:37 AM »

If you actually read the decision Fritz, you will realize that we were exactly correct on the fact that with the passage of the Civil Liberties Amdt., the Senate has no power to pass laws concerning anything except concerning elections and the rights of voters.  The Constitution never really gave it any to begin with.  It was always implied.  But with the passage of the Civil Liberties Amendment, they were explicitly taken away.

One of the reasons we did what we did was so that this Senate would stop passing Constitutional amemdments like they're just new laws.  A Constututional amendment is actually quite serious, and shouldn't be done unless absolutely necessary.  I advise everyone to remember that in the future.

Which section of the Civil Liberties Amendment explicitly repeals the Senate's authority to pass law?  If you are referring to clause 14, that is an explicit copy of Amendment 10 in the United States Constitution (right down to using the word "states" instead of "regions").  No court has ever suggested that Amendment 10 explicitly takes away Congress's ability to make law.  I still do not follow your logic here.


Besides, Fritz, only President PBrunsel can call for the impeachment of a Justice. (See Article III, Section 1)

Actually, Article III section 1 has nothing to do with impeachment, the word "impeachment" does not appear there.  That section deals with another method of removing Justices from office.  Apparantly an easier one, too- it does not require a public poll or 2/3 of the Senate; just a Presidential mandate and a simple majority in the Senate.
Logged
Fritz
JLD
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,668
United States


« Reply #2 on: November 05, 2004, 01:59:50 AM »

Well, since you put it that way...

Article I, Section 5, Clause 5. The Senate may pass a bill for the purpose of making laws, or a resolution for the purpose of declaring war, a majority of the Senators voting concurring. But all such bills and resolutions shall first be submitted to the President before taking effect; and the President may either declare his or her approval or veto it. If the President approves, or if he or she neither approves nor vetoes the bill or resolution within seven days, the bill or resolution shall take effect. But if he or she shall veto it, the bill or resolution shall be of no effect unless the Senate shall vote, two-thirds of the Senators concurring, to override the President's veto.



Doesn't that explicitly give the Senate power to make laws?Huh
 
Logged
Fritz
JLD
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,668
United States


« Reply #3 on: November 05, 2004, 02:18:29 AM »

So the Senate can pass laws, but the laws are only suggestions and don't mean anything.

I continue to disagree.  Your ruling is a stretch.

I just hope the Senate corrects the mess made by the Court quickly.
Logged
Fritz
JLD
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,668
United States


« Reply #4 on: November 05, 2004, 02:55:42 AM »

Considering this is fantasy ELECTIONS, there shouldn't be any other laws, other than election laws.  That's my personal feelings on laws passed by the Congress.

Well, the laws are fantasy laws in a fantasy government, and mean nothing in the real world.  I'll agree with that.  But the court has ruled that one fantasy government official- a Governor- can override/nullify fantasy laws in his section of the fantasy government.  That is what I take issue with.
Logged
Fritz
JLD
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,668
United States


« Reply #5 on: November 07, 2004, 03:03:23 PM »

Whereas the Senate is currently considering amendments to the Constitution which will render this ruling moot, I ask the Court to renew its ban upon any executions being carried out in the Southeast region.
Logged
Fritz
JLD
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,668
United States


« Reply #6 on: November 07, 2004, 05:52:50 PM »

I urge the Senate to address this issue in the amendment it passes.
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 0.023 seconds with 13 queries.