Bill of Rights Amendment Proposal

I think that leaving things subjective in the BoR is generally good practice - specifics should be left to subordinate documents. Building in a provision to the BoR to allow exceptions to be made to the right to choose one's attorney make it a lot easier for us to fix the problem.
 
Personally. I dont feel it is a BOR violation for the court to be able to dismiss a disruptive attorney either prosecution or defense breaking court decorum and blocking the accused from having their due process. And the AGs office can appoint a replacement and the defendant can choose a new defendant.

Like in IRL we have our constitutional rights true but sometimes there are lower procedural laws that futher clarify and set out futher guidlines and exceptions.

Instead of having all these proposals. Why cant we let the court have its own policies to deal with trolly attorneys? The BOR say a defendant can have their attorney but doesnt say the attorney gets to be disruptive towards the process.
 
Well.. at least some opinions from different perspectives have been given here. Not a bad thing.

The way I see it, this issue may never be resolved to everyone's satisfaction. Whether it's personal enmity between opposing parties, philosophical differences, different interpretations of the Law, lack of will for change, or just plain spite, we seem to be at an impasse. I understand changing the BOR is a tough hill to climb, but it will need to be changed at some point. Some commenters here have ceded there are loopholes to be exploited. You can make changes in the Legal Code, and the Court rules, but the BOR will always take precedence.

Grosse has hinted that he will propose some solutions in the future. Fine. But that includes a lot of what-ifs (for reasons stated above). Roman's Contempt Bill faces challenges as well.

I appreciate the input given here, but I feel I've watered down the Bill to the point I don't recognize it anymore. Therefore, I withdraw this Bill proposal.
 
At the request of the Bill sponsor debate will cease on this subject and the bill consider withdrawn.

If there are no objections I shall lock the thread? I'll give folks time to respond.
 
Falapatorius Today:
Well.. at least some opinions from different perspectives have been given here. Not a bad thing.

Grosse has hinted that he will propose some solutions in the future. Fine. But that includes a lot of what-ifs (for reasons stated above). Roman's Contempt Bill faces challenges as well.
Click to expand...

Patience until July would be appreciated, thank you very much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top