SB 104-20: Federal Impeachment Amendment (Tabled) (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 30, 2024, 10:25:20 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)
  SB 104-20: Federal Impeachment Amendment (Tabled) (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: SB 104-20: Federal Impeachment Amendment (Tabled)  (Read 746 times)
Unconditional Surrender Truman
Harry S Truman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,139


« on: August 08, 2021, 05:10:41 PM »

What? Regional officials aren't "civil officers of the Republic of Atlasia", they are officers of their respective regions. This is a Rosecrans amendment attempting to solve a problem that does not exist, and in the process creating a new problem via redundancy.
Logged
Unconditional Surrender Truman
Harry S Truman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,139


« Reply #1 on: August 08, 2021, 10:19:01 PM »


You're gonna have to explain this one to me. Tongue

What? Regional officials aren't "civil officers of the Republic of Atlasia", they are officers of their respective regions. This is a Rosecrans amendment attempting to solve a problem that does not exist, and in the process creating a new problem via redundancy.

Yes, and because those regions are within the Republic of Atlasia, they can still be considered civil officers of such. I just think that this line is somewhat ambiguous and could potentially lead to abuse at some point, and there is a case to be made that under the current language, the Senate could impeach non-federal officials. It's not redundant, it just clarifies the language so that an impartial (well, or partial) judge can't argue otherwise.

Well no, not really. This is literally the same language as in the U.S. constitution, which nobody argues empowers Congress to impeach state officials because that's not what "civil officers of the United States Republic of Atlasia" means. But if you add "federal", you imply that it does mean that and then every other use of "officers" becomes ambiguous. Very bad amendment, senators please vote no!
Logged
Unconditional Surrender Truman
Harry S Truman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,139


« Reply #2 on: August 08, 2021, 10:31:46 PM »

Here is the text of Article II§4 of the U.S. constitution:

Quote
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

If "civil officers of the United States" means any officeholder in the United States, why has Congress not already impeached and convicted Andrew Cuomo IRL? It is because that is not what it means! "Civil officers of the United States" refers to officials of the executive branch of the United States government, and only those officials. It does not refer to officials of the legislative branch, which is why senators cannot be impeached, and it does not refer to regional or state officials.

Unless something dramatic has happened to the English language versus IRL in the last couple of months, these words still mean what they meant in the U.S. constitution. "Civil officers of the Republic of Atlasia" refers to the president, the vice president, the secretary of state, the attorney general, and the secretary of federal elections/registrar general —no others.
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 0.026 seconds with 12 queries.