[Private] New Court, new Chief Justice

And there we are. . .

As a new Court, we'll need to select a Chief Justice per the Legal Code:

Section 3.1: Chief Justice Selection
2. Whenever the position is vacant, the Justices shall elect a Chief Justice from among themselves by a majority vote.
3. In the event that a Chief Justice has not been elected by seven days after the conclusion of a Judicial election, including the conclusion of any required run-off votes, the Chief Justice shall be the Justice who received the highest number of votes in said election. In the event of a tie for highest number of votes, the Chief Justice shall be the one among those tied with the longest period of citizenship.

Click to expand...

I'd be interested in taking on that job, but I'm also interested who else may want to. So, let's see!

I’d be mildly interested, but recognize that I may not be considered the best option.

So we’re all interested in it. I would like to lay out my priorities and concerns and if the position of Chief Justice is the best way to address them, then I will make my case for myself in the role. If we can all agree to address them regardless of who the chief is, then I would be open to considering someone else. I’ll have to go into that detail later though, I’m still mobile and at work.

In my experience, the only difference between the chief and associates is that that chief is nominally assigning the moderating justices and doing the stuff on finding THOs. I don’t mind either of you being CJ.

So here's where my mind was at: I think the court needs to make some big moves this term, and change how it operates in a major way. I want to see an effort made to have more responsive justices, quicker processing of court business and opinions, and quicker trials. There's way more delay than I think is necessary and when the delay is happening, little communication related to it. We ought to know when a delay is going to happen and should give the region a heads up rather than make them come sniffing around for answers. We need to turn around the unnecessary errors and avoidable errors in trials that lead to ridiculous decisions like the recent case with MadJack. On a personal level, I think we need to alter how we write opinions in general, and aim for more approachable, easy to explain and read opinions. I recognize that style is unique to the individuals writing the opinion, and that if I am working on an opinion I will naturally aim for that, and you don't necessarily have to, but I think we need to stop what I see as puffing up the court even as it puts out what is essentially crap.

I did speak to Pete earlier today, and I have come to understand that being Chief Justice is rather unrelated to most of what I said above. We all have to be involved in improving the court's work product and how it manages trials, and I get the sense we're all in agreement that these things are problems and that something has to change. Interestingly enough, the one thing I consider to be mostly style and my personal goal is the one thing being Chief Justice would help with: assigning justices to trials. I don't think I like the idea of having just one justice take the lead on all cases, so even if I were Chief Justice I don't think I would be writing everything anyway. When it comes to being a support who tries to speed up the process, I can do that as an associate justice, though (my inexperience showing here) I don't know how big a difference that actually makes in situations where we don't collaborate on final decisions (I assume this is primarily with R4Rs, but maybe there's input from the non-moderating justices?). That uncertainty was part of my campaign, I don't know how feasible a lot of possible reforms actually are. I am sure there is bloat and procedures we can alter, but I don't know how much weight those changes will have compared to just having justices who are making an effort to be responsive, communicate updates, and just catch dumb things in trials before they tank a case. And those reforms don't need to come from just the Chief Justice.

I do not believe I got the most votes because people wanted me to be Chief Justice, but I do believe this represents a mandate from most voters that they want to see some big changes on the court. You've both been justices before while I haven't, and Pete is the bridge between this term and the one immediately preceding it. I am here to help facilitate this change on the court, that is what I ran on and that's the message that resonated with a lot of people. I do not need to be Chief Justice to see these things through. But I would like to have some idea of how a Chief Justice could use that role to help make these things happen. I could volunteer and reimagine the job as a way to do that, but I would like to hear Pete's plan, because I suspect his experience on the court combined with what seems to me a similar appetite for these changes could make him an effective Chief Justice.

Pallaith:

When it comes to being a support who tries to speed up the process, I can do that as an associate justice, though (my inexperience showing here) I don't know how big a difference that actually makes in situations where we don't collaborate on final decisions (I assume this is primarily with R4Rs, but maybe there's input from the non-moderating justices?).

Click to expand...

Given that final decisions must receive the approval of at least a majority of justices, there should be collaboration between the Justices dealing with a case (including R4Rs). In the status quo, you'll often see that the Moderating Justice authors the opinion on their own, and then makes proposed changes, but I'd support first discussing the case on Discord before actually starting the drafting process.

Per your request, I'll outline broadly my plan as Chief Justice:

• Case assignment: I'm a fan of rotating case assignment as much as possible. This allows every Justice to moderate cases.
• THOs: I would put out a call for THOs as soon as possible, so we have an established list of volunteers when the need arrives.
• Reform: I am in favour of reforming the Court, though I personally don't see a way in which the position of Chief Justice might facilitate reform. That said, as part of the reforms, we may choose to grant some extra powers to the CJ, that is yet to be seen. I personally advocated for the appointment of at least one clerk, which I'll draft a proper proposal for.
• Declassifying threads: This has not happened consistently in the past, unfortunately - which is why I ended up declassifying 9 threads, given that it appeared the CJ in the previous term didn't declassify any. I would, if chosen as CJ, declassify threads on a monthly basis.
• Weekly Court reports: Ghost mentioned this idea. I think a monthly report may be more feasible, but we'll also have to discuss the appropriate level of transparency. Whatever we end up implementing, I'll do.

I don’t mind Pete as CJ, considering both the things on what youve said.

For the record, I was not saying we should do weekly reports. I was making a comparison to the VD reports as an example of how we ca communicate more often, but I see that as something we would only do when we have something to report. We shouldn't be obligated to make reports where we have nothing to report - but we should be more willing to report whenever we do have something going on. I want to leave in the past he days where the region has to nag the court for updates on ongoing court business when it takes some time to complete.

I'm going to do my part to keep us aware of what's going on and to be speedy and efficient in completing our tasks. I do not need to be Chief Justice to do that. I am perfectly happy to defer to the guy who has more experience, not just generally (since you do too LD) but in terms of continuity from the previous court. I know what I am here to do and I will make sure it gets done either way. Let's settle this question now so we can be responsive to things like that R4R that just showed up. I can already see that the time zones and schedules we have are going to present a challenge, but if we have Pete on top of things running the Court, we should have good coverage throughout the day for court business.

To be absolutely clear, I support Pete for Chief Justice. Given LD's previous post, I think we are in agreement and can make it official when Pete comes back online.

Thank you both. I'll put out an announcement.