Mall4Court

An undoubtedly excellent justice such as yourself would certainly strengthen the Court as a whole by bringing a fresh perspective to the table. How forceful do you intend to be when your opinions inevitably differ from those of other justices? Additionally, what changes (if any) would you like to see made to the manner in which the Court operates?
 
Theoreticals

1. Its Liberation Day. The Ministry of Radio has released a show talking about why this day is important. @Praetor files a criminal complaint because radio shows are non-essential government business. Dreadton points out that Non-essential government business is undefined and that an essential government function is educating the population about the reasons behind Memorial Days. Where would you go to seek guidance on what is essential or non-essential?

2. A citizen opens a thread to change the standing procedures to require a 24 hour period between the opening of debate and a vote, except when an emergency is declared. The thread is closed by the Speaker. He states that such a discussion is not in the interest of the region. The citizen files a R4R. He states that the Speaker violated the rules, as limiting the power of the Speaker is in the interest of the region. The speaker states he has broad leeway in controlling debate. He also points out that the Citizen has been critical of him in the past and this is just an attempt to harm him politically. The Speaker continues to end debate on any attempt to change the rules or laws that would limit his power. Finally, a recall motion is published to remove the Speaker. The Speaker closes debate on the recall in the interest of the region. What legal avenues are left for the Citizens of the Region?
 
Praetor:
Would you say that you are Courting us for our votes?

:w00t:
Click to expand...
HEYYYYOOOOOO
Cretox State:
An undoubtedly excellent justice such as yourself would certainly strengthen the Court as a whole by bringing a fresh perspective to the table. How forceful do you intend to be when your opinions inevitably differ from those of other justices? Additionally, what changes (if any) would you like to see made to the manner in which the Court operates?
Click to expand...
I'll kick and scream like a brat every time we disagree. As far as changes, I haven't thought that far ahead.
Cosmosplosion:
I must ask, how hard do you believe the court must bash the fash? This hard? Or this hard? Or like this?
Click to expand...
Harder.
Dreadton:
Theoreticals

1. Its Liberation Day. The Ministry of Radio has released a show talking about why this day is important. @Praetor files a criminal complaint because radio shows are non-essential government business. Dreadton points out that Non-essential government business is undefined and that an essential government function is educating the population about the reasons behind Memorial Days. Where would you go to seek guidance on what is essential or non-essential?

2. A citizen opens a thread to change the standing procedures to require a 24 hour period between the opening of debate and a vote, except when an emergency is declared. The thread is closed by the Speaker. He states that such a discussion is not in the interest of the region. The citizen files a R4R. He states that the Speaker violated the rules, as limiting the power of the Speaker is in the interest of the region. The speaker states he has broad leeway in controlling debate. He also points out that the Citizen has been critical of him in the past and this is just an attempt to harm him politically. The Speaker continues to end debate on any attempt to change the rules or laws that would limit his power. Finally, a recall motion is published to remove the Speaker. The Speaker closes debate on the recall in the interest of the region. What legal avenues are left for the Citizens of the Region?
Click to expand...
I'll be honest that second paragraph looks huge on my phone and I'm hungover, so I'll just pass on these two questions. Cheers for what I'm sure were thoughtful inquiries.
 
On the subject of sobriety: some may say that intoxication interferes with the ability of a Justice to perform their official duties. What are your thoughts?
 
Cretox State:
On the subject of sobriety: some may say that intoxication interferes with the ability of a Justice to perform their official duties. What are your thoughts?
Click to expand...
There's a strong argument that any Justice who claims to be sober while performing their official duties is obviously lying.
 
Mall:
There's a strong argument that any Justice who claims to be sober while performing their official duties is obviously lying.
Click to expand...
On the subject of insobriety, you never came back to finish that beer at a place, though a couple of us joined you that night. Feel free to drop on by and join us.
 
Comfed:
I think @Mall might be winning...
Click to expand...
Isn’t that great?
uH2t70Y.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top