July 11, 2024
[7:24 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @Court please review: https://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/9198520/post-10695742
July 13, 2024
[1:26 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Is this thing on? @Court
[1:41 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I apologize! I've been in a mini-vacation. I'm on my way home.
[1:41 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Once Im home youll have my answer
[3:57 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): I've been writing my thoughts down, but I've been all over the place for the past three days, will have my answer once I'm back from work
July 15, 2024
[7:05 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Alright I have announced the chief and bar commissioner picks, hopefully now we can get a formal court examiner appointment and open the door to some potential routine r4rs
July 17, 2024
[6:47 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I'll take my oath this night
July 24, 2024
[4:18 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @WAAGH Time! Vivanco I’m concerned the bar commission hasn’t formalized the examiner yet, is that going to be done soon?
[4:21 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I will get on it ASAP, there seems like there wasn't a debate for the term, I'll have it done right away
July 26, 2024
[5:09 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: It's been asked! I've pinged both Zyvet and Lord Dominator (the fellow commissioners according to the roster), and as soon as they give the thumbs up, it'll be sorted
July 27, 2024
[4:40 AM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): I'm going to take a look at the list of available THOs
July 28, 2024
[12:36 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: I have launched the court clerks program: https://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/9198559/post-10697679
July 29, 2024
[10:11 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: and here we go: https://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/9198568/
[10:12 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @Court
[10:12 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): Yeah, just saw it
July 30, 2024
[11:12 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: We have another one: https://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/9198569/
I’m happy to have one of you take this on as moderating justice @Court
[11:13 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): I can do this one
[11:14 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Being the moderating justice doesn’t automatically mean you’re responsible for the ultimate ruling by the way, so don’t feel like there’s pressure to do that if you accept the R4R
[11:15 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): No problem
July 31, 2024
[1:32 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I can take it, but if @LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC) wants to take it, by all means.
[1:33 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I can take the next one
[1:35 AM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): I'm halfway through cooking at the moment, but I'll be on it afterwards
[7:11 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Well look we got a third one: https://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/9198576/unread
[7:11 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC) don’t forget we will need a private discussion thread in our court chambers for the R4R you are moderating
[7:12 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @WAAGH Time! Vivanco there’s three of us and three R4Rs so if you want to moderate this one, I defer to you
August 1, 2024
[1:55 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I'll catch this one
[1:56 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Got it!
August 4, 2024
[2:58 AM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): https://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/9198566/
@Pallaith, Just a Justice
Briefing period has closed on this one
[3:10 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Good looking out
[3:11 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Any initial thoughts on the matter as I close it up?
[7:10 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Okay I guess I’ll start. The judicial FoIA one isn’t that complicated but it requires a bit more care than the SC one. That’s because there is definitely an aspect that’s defunct, but there’s a contradiction between current practice and the ruling and it may not be as simple as throwing out that ruling. This is more a case of the ruling may have been over-broad but not necessarily wrong in intention, so we have to dial it back a bit.
The SC one is a slam dunk in my view, I think we’re looking at a very simple defunct clause while leaving everything intact. There’s a brief that seems to want to challenge the notion the SC isn’t part of the executive, that’s not at issue with the review but even if it is, there’s no strong case there for that conclusion.
The NPA one is not quite as simple at first glance. Whether the prior ruling is defunct or not depends on whether you think the new law actually crafted the opposite of what that ruling said. If you do, then it’s defunct. If you don’t, then we may have to affirm the ruling and trigger yet another effort in the RA to fix the law. And whether you think it’s actually defunct or not, there’s the possibility of reexamining the original conclusion altogether. So once we agree on which approach is the one to take, we can apply the appropriate remedy
[10:40 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): Right
[11:50 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: I’m still mulling over the NPA one but I think I have a pretty clear approach to the other two
[11:52 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: I’ll throw some thoughts into the threads
August 5, 2024
[2:15 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Apologies, I was away yesterday!
[2:15 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I shall give my insight ASAP
[2:46 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: I’m feeling inspired, I think I might have an angle on a draft opinion for the NPA case. But there’s a lot there so I really want to hear from both of you before I spill the ink
August 6, 2024
[9:15 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I will post in the weekend my full thoughts
[9:15 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: (This week I have it full with many RL cases.)
August 9, 2024
[10:08 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: And with the work week done, I will begin redacting my thoughts
August 10, 2024
[1:49 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: I’m really looking forward to diving into these finally, I think we have a very clear path to getting two of these rulings done relatively quickly
[5:39 AM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): Yes, I presume the SC one will be quick to do, given that it should just be striking one particular part
[10:25 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: So then I think you should take a stab at it @LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC) I know you wanted to jump into a decision to write this would be a good start
August 11, 2024
[4:36 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I'm almost done with the draft of my thoughts
August 12, 2024
[3:50 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Tomorrow I'll post them!
[3:50 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: (Took a bit longer than I expected)
August 13, 2024
[5:29 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: You’re both keeping me in such suspense
[5:30 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: We’re over a week in deliberations on the first one, when our goal is to respond within two weeks
August 14, 2024
[8:32 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I have no excuse on that one, work's been keeping me busy.
August 16, 2024
[6:12 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Alright perhaps I should draft the other two opinions? But I’d still need you to look over them
[6:12 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: There really is no reason for us to delay the first two opinions any further
August 17, 2024
[7:04 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Oh, please, I do want to take a gander at my own opinion. I have some drafted already, it's just me needing to clear off some of the edges and fix some mannerisms and writings.
August 18, 2024
[2:10 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): I've been hit with a multitude of really annoying illnesses, I'll see what I can get done tonight
August 20, 2024
[10:38 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Well I’m sorry the timing has been terrible for both of you, I really don’t want to be that naggy person, but do either of you think we can move any of this business forward this week? I had to put an update on my moderated r4r thread that we missed the two week mark, you probably want to do something similar for your respective threads
[3:07 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: ALRIGHT! I GOT TIME NOW!
[3:08 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: This week you ABSOLUTELY got it. @Pallaith, Just a Justice I had a kind-a big case that got an answer. But now that it's been officially accepted, I totally can spend some time in it ;P
August 24, 2024
[10:55 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @Court so think we might be able to get those moving?
August 26, 2024
[12:41 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Posted my thoughts an all three!
[11:16 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Well I definitely have some thoughts on the last one
[12:16 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I sure expected that
[12:16 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco:
August 30, 2024
[12:07 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @Court well it's been a while so I tried to move things along a little
[12:08 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: there's a draft opinion for the NPA r4r, and I actually have one for the SC FOIA one as well, but really anyone can take a stab at that one and I still invite one of you to give it a go - obviously if we do have two justices at odds on the NPA case, then we'll have to navigate that, but at least I think I made my clearest version of my argument in the opinion format so we at least have that angle covered
September 2, 2024
[10:53 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @Court I have now provided a draft for the SC FOIA r4r. I do not believe this should be taking as long as it is, and I am concerned that we're spinning our wheels. It's a good thing this is all we have on our plate because I am not confident we can do more immediate things or something requiring emergency action, and that's not great
September 3, 2024
[1:10 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I will be providing today the NPA case draft
September 4, 2024
[12:39 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: While redacting the draft, I found this.
[12:40 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: @Pallaith, Just a Justice
[12:48 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: What are you trying to point out to me?
[1:17 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I don't get the "2024" thing. Is it a mistake, is it a year divider?
[1:31 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Yeah the decisions are broken out by the years they were done, and I also track how many opinions were written by each of the justices
[10:19 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Ooooh
[10:19 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Got it
[10:19 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @Court I would really appreciate if we could get these r4rs out soon I feel like we’re almost there
[10:20 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): I've just gotten back to reading it, I'm happy for the SC one to go out if you want me to post it
[10:20 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: We should confirm we’re all agreed on it
[10:20 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Sounds like we have 2/3
[10:21 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): Yeah, we've got 2/3
September 5, 2024
[4:08 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I'm on mine!
[4:08 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Worry not, it's being worked upon. I should have the draft done today. If I can get the proper writing
[4:09 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I have found out that I can be very confusing sometimes
[10:04 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC) we can get that decision posted as soon as you're online to post it
[10:08 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): Yep, I'll do that now
September 8, 2024
[2:46 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @WAAGH Time! Vivanco you've hyped it so much I am worried my expectations will be too high! I hope we can see your take on the opinion soon
September 9, 2024
[6:01 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Half-way.
I think I might be proof-reading too much into it. I will post as-is.
[6:02 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I worry they will be too high indeed. I simply am trying to correct errors of my past of being too rowdy and going round and round.
While falling into it again.
Will post as-is.
September 10, 2024
[12:41 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: great, I encourage that - please do
[1:07 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @WAAGH Time! Vivanco especially if your opinion is particularly lengthy and splits hairs, we need time to consider it too. I hope we’ll be seeing it imminently?
September 11, 2024
[6:26 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Yes. Tonight without delay.
[1:11 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: @Court https://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/9198580/post-10702727
[2:43 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: @LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC) You're the star of the Court!
[2:47 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): Apparently so :3
[2:48 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Yeah, if you could kindly review the draft opinions and let us know where you stand? There may be room for me to adjust the opinion a bit by clarifying matters of the decision being correctly decided (which to some extent my opinion does), because Vivanco wants to protect the legitimacy of the original ruling. That’s something that’s limited by the fact I feel it wrongly argued its case in the first place, but maybe there’s something I can do. Of course if you’re on board with that argument in the first place, then we may have a concurring opinion on this one
[2:49 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: I think Vivanco and I will ultimately sign on to a majority opinion that overturns the previous ruling, but we will have different reasons for how we get there
[2:49 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Indeed, the goal and the ruling is the same. It's simply the how where we differ.
[2:50 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: So Nutmeg decides which one is the official opinion on how it’s done
[2:50 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Of course if we’re close we should keep trying to find one that all three can agree on without reservation
[2:51 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): Of course
[2:57 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: So, it's time to be the deciding factor seems like
[2:57 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: [REDACTED]
[2:57 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: [REDACTED]
[2:57 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): Luckily I'm currently free and available to do so
[2:59 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @WAAGH Time! Vivanco do you believe there’s any realistic way to rework your opinion toward us, or will we have a 3-0 on mine and a separate concurrence from you?
[3:00 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: If you do a concurrence you might want to hammer the differences a bit more to show why you are writing separately
[3:00 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: I want your case to be as strongly stated as possible and pointing out the nuance is key
[3:01 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I could try to adapt my opinion but it could take longer and maybe we've had enough time (and mostly I am to blame in this regard)
[3:02 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I won't mind a 3-0 signature on yours with a separate concurrence.
[3:02 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Okay, the concurrence doesn’t need to be published immediately after the main opinion, if you want more time to tweak it
[3:02 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: We actually almost never have multiple opinions so there’s no strict rule on how it’s done
[3:03 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: But you’re good to post the opinion when you have a chance
[3:03 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: If we go with it, I'd say to comment on the signatures part in the heading of the draft, to signal a separate concurrence coming alongside the signature.
[3:04 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Joined by Justices Nutmegthe Squirrel and Vivanco, who filed a separate concurrence? Like that?
[3:05 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: As in, for example in this case, "drafted by Chief Justice Pallaith, joined by Justice Nutmeg the Squirrel and Justice Vivanco (With a Separate Concurrence)" maybe
[3:05 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Mostly as a heads-up and a signal for future reviews
[3:06 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: It could work like that, indeed
September 12, 2024
[12:18 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: I updated my opinion with that line so it should be good to go for publishing
September 13, 2024
[1:55 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I just now notices something @Pallaith, Just a Justice
It does not take into account QuietDad's briefing
[7:39 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: That was intentional. That was not a briefing and I did not consider it
[7:40 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @WAAGH Time! Vivanco
[11:03 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Understood
September 15, 2024
[9:12 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @Court I just wanted to say, great job everyone, glad we got through those r4rs at last! I wanted to tackle something else, possible ways to enhance or rework the information on our court rulings page. I think it looks good the way it is now, but I think we can possibly find ways to link even quicker to cases of similar types, or maybe current controlling law on a given topic, bypassing anything defunct or overturned. If you have any thoughts on this, we either have a few days to tinker with it before I have to leave the Court again, or all the time in the world. Right now it's really up in the air, but to cover all the possibilities I wanted to bring it up now while there was still time
September 17, 2024
[7:48 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Well, I think it's quite accessible as it is currently!
October 16, 2024
[9:34 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): @Court
I'd like to start looking for some Clerks
[9:42 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: I’ve had a bunch working on briefs during the last r4r blitz. I had some volunteers to provide them with legal quizzes but none of them brought me any content I could use
[9:42 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: I can invite you to the group and you can task them with some stuff if you want
[9:56 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): That would be nice thanks
October 17, 2024
[12:39 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Oooh, could I be invited aswell?
October 24, 2024
[12:29 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @Court we are reviewing a ban: https://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/9198790/
October 25, 2024
[12:51 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Oooo, fancy
November 12, 2024
[10:55 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @WAAGH Time! Vivanco if I’m not mistaken, didn’t you have a concurring opinion you were going to write on our last R4R? Was wondering when you’d have that available for publishing
[10:56 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: [REDACTED]
[10:56 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I'm still cooking it
[10:57 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: If we want it up to high standards I'm having it to those standards
[10:58 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: I was just checking
[10:58 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: I don’t want our legal records to miss it, it’s a rare second opinion out of an R4R
Pallaith, Just a Justice is Pallaith, CJ., WAAGH Time! Vivanco is Vivanco, J., LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC) is Nutmeg the Squirrel, J.
[7:24 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @Court please review: https://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/9198520/post-10695742
July 13, 2024
[1:26 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Is this thing on? @Court
[1:41 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I apologize! I've been in a mini-vacation. I'm on my way home.
[1:41 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Once Im home youll have my answer
[3:57 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): I've been writing my thoughts down, but I've been all over the place for the past three days, will have my answer once I'm back from work
July 15, 2024
[7:05 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Alright I have announced the chief and bar commissioner picks, hopefully now we can get a formal court examiner appointment and open the door to some potential routine r4rs
July 17, 2024
[6:47 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I'll take my oath this night
July 24, 2024
[4:18 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @WAAGH Time! Vivanco I’m concerned the bar commission hasn’t formalized the examiner yet, is that going to be done soon?
[4:21 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I will get on it ASAP, there seems like there wasn't a debate for the term, I'll have it done right away
July 26, 2024
[5:09 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: It's been asked! I've pinged both Zyvet and Lord Dominator (the fellow commissioners according to the roster), and as soon as they give the thumbs up, it'll be sorted
July 27, 2024
[4:40 AM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): I'm going to take a look at the list of available THOs
July 28, 2024
[12:36 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: I have launched the court clerks program: https://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/9198559/post-10697679
July 29, 2024
[10:11 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: and here we go: https://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/9198568/
[10:12 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @Court
[10:12 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): Yeah, just saw it
July 30, 2024
[11:12 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: We have another one: https://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/9198569/
I’m happy to have one of you take this on as moderating justice @Court
[11:13 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): I can do this one
[11:14 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Being the moderating justice doesn’t automatically mean you’re responsible for the ultimate ruling by the way, so don’t feel like there’s pressure to do that if you accept the R4R
[11:15 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): No problem
July 31, 2024
[1:32 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I can take it, but if @LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC) wants to take it, by all means.
[1:33 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I can take the next one
[1:35 AM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): I'm halfway through cooking at the moment, but I'll be on it afterwards
[7:11 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Well look we got a third one: https://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/9198576/unread
[7:11 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC) don’t forget we will need a private discussion thread in our court chambers for the R4R you are moderating
[7:12 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @WAAGH Time! Vivanco there’s three of us and three R4Rs so if you want to moderate this one, I defer to you
August 1, 2024
[1:55 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I'll catch this one
[1:56 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Got it!
August 4, 2024
[2:58 AM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): https://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/9198566/
@Pallaith, Just a Justice
Briefing period has closed on this one
[3:10 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Good looking out
[3:11 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Any initial thoughts on the matter as I close it up?
[7:10 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Okay I guess I’ll start. The judicial FoIA one isn’t that complicated but it requires a bit more care than the SC one. That’s because there is definitely an aspect that’s defunct, but there’s a contradiction between current practice and the ruling and it may not be as simple as throwing out that ruling. This is more a case of the ruling may have been over-broad but not necessarily wrong in intention, so we have to dial it back a bit.
The SC one is a slam dunk in my view, I think we’re looking at a very simple defunct clause while leaving everything intact. There’s a brief that seems to want to challenge the notion the SC isn’t part of the executive, that’s not at issue with the review but even if it is, there’s no strong case there for that conclusion.
The NPA one is not quite as simple at first glance. Whether the prior ruling is defunct or not depends on whether you think the new law actually crafted the opposite of what that ruling said. If you do, then it’s defunct. If you don’t, then we may have to affirm the ruling and trigger yet another effort in the RA to fix the law. And whether you think it’s actually defunct or not, there’s the possibility of reexamining the original conclusion altogether. So once we agree on which approach is the one to take, we can apply the appropriate remedy
[10:40 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): Right
[11:50 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: I’m still mulling over the NPA one but I think I have a pretty clear approach to the other two
[11:52 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: I’ll throw some thoughts into the threads
August 5, 2024
[2:15 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Apologies, I was away yesterday!
[2:15 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I shall give my insight ASAP
[2:46 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: I’m feeling inspired, I think I might have an angle on a draft opinion for the NPA case. But there’s a lot there so I really want to hear from both of you before I spill the ink
August 6, 2024
[9:15 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I will post in the weekend my full thoughts
[9:15 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: (This week I have it full with many RL cases.)
August 9, 2024
[10:08 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: And with the work week done, I will begin redacting my thoughts
August 10, 2024
[1:49 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: I’m really looking forward to diving into these finally, I think we have a very clear path to getting two of these rulings done relatively quickly
[5:39 AM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): Yes, I presume the SC one will be quick to do, given that it should just be striking one particular part
[10:25 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: So then I think you should take a stab at it @LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC) I know you wanted to jump into a decision to write this would be a good start
August 11, 2024
[4:36 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I'm almost done with the draft of my thoughts
August 12, 2024
[3:50 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Tomorrow I'll post them!
[3:50 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: (Took a bit longer than I expected)
August 13, 2024
[5:29 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: You’re both keeping me in such suspense
[5:30 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: We’re over a week in deliberations on the first one, when our goal is to respond within two weeks
August 14, 2024
[8:32 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I have no excuse on that one, work's been keeping me busy.
August 16, 2024
[6:12 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Alright perhaps I should draft the other two opinions? But I’d still need you to look over them
[6:12 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: There really is no reason for us to delay the first two opinions any further
August 17, 2024
[7:04 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Oh, please, I do want to take a gander at my own opinion. I have some drafted already, it's just me needing to clear off some of the edges and fix some mannerisms and writings.
August 18, 2024
[2:10 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): I've been hit with a multitude of really annoying illnesses, I'll see what I can get done tonight
August 20, 2024
[10:38 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Well I’m sorry the timing has been terrible for both of you, I really don’t want to be that naggy person, but do either of you think we can move any of this business forward this week? I had to put an update on my moderated r4r thread that we missed the two week mark, you probably want to do something similar for your respective threads
[3:07 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: ALRIGHT! I GOT TIME NOW!
[3:08 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: This week you ABSOLUTELY got it. @Pallaith, Just a Justice I had a kind-a big case that got an answer. But now that it's been officially accepted, I totally can spend some time in it ;P
August 24, 2024
[10:55 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @Court so think we might be able to get those moving?
August 26, 2024
[12:41 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Posted my thoughts an all three!
[11:16 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Well I definitely have some thoughts on the last one
[12:16 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I sure expected that
[12:16 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco:
August 30, 2024
[12:07 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @Court well it's been a while so I tried to move things along a little
[12:08 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: there's a draft opinion for the NPA r4r, and I actually have one for the SC FOIA one as well, but really anyone can take a stab at that one and I still invite one of you to give it a go - obviously if we do have two justices at odds on the NPA case, then we'll have to navigate that, but at least I think I made my clearest version of my argument in the opinion format so we at least have that angle covered
September 2, 2024
[10:53 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @Court I have now provided a draft for the SC FOIA r4r. I do not believe this should be taking as long as it is, and I am concerned that we're spinning our wheels. It's a good thing this is all we have on our plate because I am not confident we can do more immediate things or something requiring emergency action, and that's not great
September 3, 2024
[1:10 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I will be providing today the NPA case draft
September 4, 2024
[12:39 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: While redacting the draft, I found this.
[12:40 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: @Pallaith, Just a Justice
[12:48 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: What are you trying to point out to me?
[1:17 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I don't get the "2024" thing. Is it a mistake, is it a year divider?
[1:31 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Yeah the decisions are broken out by the years they were done, and I also track how many opinions were written by each of the justices
[10:19 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Ooooh
[10:19 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Got it
[10:19 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @Court I would really appreciate if we could get these r4rs out soon I feel like we’re almost there
[10:20 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): I've just gotten back to reading it, I'm happy for the SC one to go out if you want me to post it
[10:20 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: We should confirm we’re all agreed on it
[10:20 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Sounds like we have 2/3
[10:21 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): Yeah, we've got 2/3
September 5, 2024
[4:08 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I'm on mine!
[4:08 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Worry not, it's being worked upon. I should have the draft done today. If I can get the proper writing
[4:09 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I have found out that I can be very confusing sometimes
[10:04 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC) we can get that decision posted as soon as you're online to post it
[10:08 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): Yep, I'll do that now
September 8, 2024
[2:46 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @WAAGH Time! Vivanco you've hyped it so much I am worried my expectations will be too high! I hope we can see your take on the opinion soon
September 9, 2024
[6:01 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Half-way.
I think I might be proof-reading too much into it. I will post as-is.
[6:02 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I worry they will be too high indeed. I simply am trying to correct errors of my past of being too rowdy and going round and round.
While falling into it again.
Will post as-is.
September 10, 2024
[12:41 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: great, I encourage that - please do
[1:07 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @WAAGH Time! Vivanco especially if your opinion is particularly lengthy and splits hairs, we need time to consider it too. I hope we’ll be seeing it imminently?
September 11, 2024
[6:26 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Yes. Tonight without delay.
[1:11 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: @Court https://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/9198580/post-10702727
[2:43 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: @LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC) You're the star of the Court!
[2:47 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): Apparently so :3
[2:48 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Yeah, if you could kindly review the draft opinions and let us know where you stand? There may be room for me to adjust the opinion a bit by clarifying matters of the decision being correctly decided (which to some extent my opinion does), because Vivanco wants to protect the legitimacy of the original ruling. That’s something that’s limited by the fact I feel it wrongly argued its case in the first place, but maybe there’s something I can do. Of course if you’re on board with that argument in the first place, then we may have a concurring opinion on this one
[2:49 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: I think Vivanco and I will ultimately sign on to a majority opinion that overturns the previous ruling, but we will have different reasons for how we get there
[2:49 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Indeed, the goal and the ruling is the same. It's simply the how where we differ.
[2:50 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: So Nutmeg decides which one is the official opinion on how it’s done
[2:50 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Of course if we’re close we should keep trying to find one that all three can agree on without reservation
[2:51 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): Of course
[2:57 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: So, it's time to be the deciding factor seems like
[2:57 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: [REDACTED]
[2:57 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: [REDACTED]
[2:57 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): Luckily I'm currently free and available to do so
[2:59 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @WAAGH Time! Vivanco do you believe there’s any realistic way to rework your opinion toward us, or will we have a 3-0 on mine and a separate concurrence from you?
[3:00 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: If you do a concurrence you might want to hammer the differences a bit more to show why you are writing separately
[3:00 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: I want your case to be as strongly stated as possible and pointing out the nuance is key
[3:01 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I could try to adapt my opinion but it could take longer and maybe we've had enough time (and mostly I am to blame in this regard)
[3:02 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I won't mind a 3-0 signature on yours with a separate concurrence.
[3:02 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Okay, the concurrence doesn’t need to be published immediately after the main opinion, if you want more time to tweak it
[3:02 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: We actually almost never have multiple opinions so there’s no strict rule on how it’s done
[3:03 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: But you’re good to post the opinion when you have a chance
[3:03 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: If we go with it, I'd say to comment on the signatures part in the heading of the draft, to signal a separate concurrence coming alongside the signature.
[3:04 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: Joined by Justices Nutmegthe Squirrel and Vivanco, who filed a separate concurrence? Like that?
[3:05 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: As in, for example in this case, "drafted by Chief Justice Pallaith, joined by Justice Nutmeg the Squirrel and Justice Vivanco (With a Separate Concurrence)" maybe
[3:05 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Mostly as a heads-up and a signal for future reviews
[3:06 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: It could work like that, indeed
September 12, 2024
[12:18 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: I updated my opinion with that line so it should be good to go for publishing
September 13, 2024
[1:55 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I just now notices something @Pallaith, Just a Justice
It does not take into account QuietDad's briefing
[7:39 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: That was intentional. That was not a briefing and I did not consider it
[7:40 AM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @WAAGH Time! Vivanco
[11:03 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Understood
September 15, 2024
[9:12 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @Court I just wanted to say, great job everyone, glad we got through those r4rs at last! I wanted to tackle something else, possible ways to enhance or rework the information on our court rulings page. I think it looks good the way it is now, but I think we can possibly find ways to link even quicker to cases of similar types, or maybe current controlling law on a given topic, bypassing anything defunct or overturned. If you have any thoughts on this, we either have a few days to tinker with it before I have to leave the Court again, or all the time in the world. Right now it's really up in the air, but to cover all the possibilities I wanted to bring it up now while there was still time
September 17, 2024
[7:48 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Well, I think it's quite accessible as it is currently!
October 16, 2024
[9:34 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): @Court
I'd like to start looking for some Clerks
[9:42 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: I’ve had a bunch working on briefs during the last r4r blitz. I had some volunteers to provide them with legal quizzes but none of them brought me any content I could use
[9:42 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: I can invite you to the group and you can task them with some stuff if you want
[9:56 PM]LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC): That would be nice thanks
October 17, 2024
[12:39 AM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Oooh, could I be invited aswell?
October 24, 2024
[12:29 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @Court we are reviewing a ban: https://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/9198790/
October 25, 2024
[12:51 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: Oooo, fancy
November 12, 2024
[10:55 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: @WAAGH Time! Vivanco if I’m not mistaken, didn’t you have a concurring opinion you were going to write on our last R4R? Was wondering when you’d have that available for publishing
[10:56 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: [REDACTED]
[10:56 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: I'm still cooking it
[10:57 PM]WAAGH Time! Vivanco: If we want it up to high standards I'm having it to those standards
[10:58 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: I was just checking
[10:58 PM]Pallaith, Just a Justice: I don’t want our legal records to miss it, it’s a rare second opinion out of an R4R
Pallaith, Just a Justice is Pallaith, CJ., WAAGH Time! Vivanco is Vivanco, J., LerriuqsEhtGemtun (TAC) is Nutmeg the Squirrel, J.