UNDER DEBATE: Judicial Review Power Tweak

[Eluvatar]

In considering various hypotheticals, r3n and I came across the realization that the clause governing the Court's powers of review is arguably unnecessarily narrow.

Since we've wanted to require standing in requests for review for a while, I'd like to propose a bill which does both.

1. Article 4 Clause 1 of the Constitution will be amended as follows:

1. The Court will try all criminal and civil cases, resolve conflicts or ambiguities in the law, and review the constitutionality of laws or legality of government policies by request of an affected party.

 

[Gaspo]

Reasonable.

 

[Eluvatar]

Due notice: I'll be making a motion that the RA vote on this this weekend, a week after it was submitted, unless constructive criticism leads me to consider changes.

 

[r3naissanc3r]

Since we are here:

It occurs to me that nowhere in the Constitution is constitutional supremacy established. There is only clause 4(1), the one we are amending, which could be interpreted to imply this, but that would be a very stretched interpretation and therefore a very weak argument of supremacy.

I propose we include the following in this amendment:

Article 8 of the Constitution is hereby amended to read as follows:

Article 8. Amendments and Supremacy

1. The Regional Assembly may amend this Constitution by a two-thirds majority vote.
2. The Regional Assembly may amend the Bill of Rights by a three-quarters majority vote.
3. This Constitution is the supreme law of The North Pacific. Any law that irreconcilably conflicts with the Constitution is, to the extent of the conflict, void.

 

[Gaspo]

Constitution, Article 6 Clause 5

5. No law or government policy may contradict this constitution.

 

[r3naissanc3r]

Thank you, missed that. We can scratch my proposed addition then.

 

[Gaspo]

Given the complete lack of debate on this, I see no reason to give the RA more time to consider it. Motion to vote.

 

[Belschaft]

Seconded.

 

[Eluvatar]

I support this motion, though I would not object to the Speaker including a period of time for reflection in case we missed something.

 

[Kiwi]

I support the proposed amendment and accordingly third the motion.

 

[r3naissanc3r]

I was going through the Constitution, and realized that this had yet to pass. So, to bump it back into the queue for the next Speaker, I support the motion to vote.

 

[Gaspo]

Indeed.

 

[Crushing Our Enemies]

Seeing a motion to vote and a second, I have opened a voting thread for this proposal, found HERE. It will remain open until 17:00 GMT on January 26th.