Search results

Then I would like to formally object to the speaker's decision to schedule a vote and request that the speaker consider sending the bill back to the floor for a further debate before it goes to a vote. I think there are some final adjustments that need to be made before this is ready. I am...

Can I make a motion to extend debate?

Would it be reasonable to restrict complainants to citizens?

So the phrase, "that arise from disputes between citizens where the plaintiff(s) have sustained actual damages" defines "suites", but not "misdemeanors", is that correct? And both of these are considered "civil offenses"? I don't necessarily have a problem with the current wording, I'm just...

I would be open to clarifying that there are two classes of civil offenses: misdemeanors or suits between citizens. I would assume the former would be easier to prove, whereas the latter would be more difficult since there would be more room for judicial discretion. Either way the way clause...

The bill provides the framework for defining civil offenses. Right now there is no such framework, except for a passing reference to civil cases in the Constitution. So while we have clear definitions of criminal offenses, we're left to guess whether we have 0 civil offenses or ? civil...

I prefer this as well. The first bill was flawed and should never have gotten to the floor for a vote.

Fenichi checks clean.

Looks good to me!

Looks good. The only thing I think needs to be adjusted is the second clause's second sentence. It doesn't stand on its own.

Why does the first clause not cover that?

I would have liked more time for discussion to refine this bill. It's a good idea, but it needs quite a bit of work.

I've thought about this quite a bit and would like to propose the following changes to the current draft: Change capitalization to be as consistent as possible both within the bill and with the Legal Code. Clarify that offenses are defined as misdemeanors/suits, not the laws themselves...

Ah I see.

Seconded. (Do we need someone to second the motion? I thought it automatically went to a vote after Formal Debate, under the current Standing Procedures.)

That's fine with me.

I believe Flem voted 'for' earlier in the thread? I'll go ahead and add a 'For' as well.

Under the amended proposal 'reopen nominations' would not have received the majority of votes and therefore would not trigger a reopening of nominations. I think that's fair. I would suggest the following changes, though: The first change clarifies that the in-progress voting closes without...

Can we extract the defamation piece of this bill and debate and vote on that separately? I seems to me that the civil law piece, and maybe even the contempt piece, would be easier to pass as a separate bill.

TNP Nation: Ator People Justice: Abstain

I'm in favor of passing a bill of this nature. The specifics will have to be worked out. The defamation piece needs some more work, especially regarding private conversations. And is contempt here a civil violation or a criminal one? What penalties can be imposed for contempt?

What legal principles ought to be used to determine the outcome of civil cases in our region?

What legal principles ought to be used to determine the outcome of civil cases in our region?

To be honest, I'm unsure how we will go about a civil trial. A civil case is a legal dispute between parties, not simply any dispute. We have no laws or precedent relating to civil disputes, as far as I can tell. And the plaintiff in this particular case claims no legal basis for his claims...

Against.

How would the use of common law be codified...or does it need to be codified at all?

Not only does it require that free expression of religion not be infringed, it also requires that the aforementioned expression "be encouraged". It seems to me that it's a valid point to suggest that the establishment of an official religion might discourage expression of another religion, even...

Perhaps I am missing something? Or are we assuming that a censure is not a law?

Yes, I can confirm the fix works for me on the test forum for those three themes.

I too must voice my opposition to this bill, not only out of preference and cultural opposition, but also out of the very real possibility that it violates §2 of the Bill of Rights. And such a constitutional objection should be considered a serious reason not to bring this to the floor for a vote.