CR3- Judiciary Act of Year 22; Hanna (LAW)
5 posters
Page 1 of 1
CR3- Judiciary Act of Year 22; Hanna (LAW)
The next two justices who depart the court shall not be replaced, except in the case of the Chief Justice.
If by the Year 28 of the simulation the two seats have not been vacated the resignations will be forced
If by the Year 28 of the simulation the two seats have not been vacated the resignations will be forced
Last edited by The Prez on Mon Jan 25, 2010 9:11 pm; edited 3 times in total
Re: CR3- Judiciary Act of Year 22; Hanna (LAW)
Utahraptor wrote:yea if changed to year 27. roar.
AgentW- Posts : 917
Join date : 2009-05-26
Location : Mandalore
McSnuggles- Admin
- Posts : 1076
Join date : 2009-05-25
Location : Here
Re: CR3- Judiciary Act of Year 22; Hanna (LAW)
This bill is wrong. We cannot destroy two seats on the Court and fire Clifton and Sheldon from their positions for no decent reason.
No rationalization for this bill was ever provided, and as such I could not vote on it.
Can this be sued? It's a MASSIVE conflict of interest for all court members, and Casey as Solicitor General as well.
No rationalization for this bill was ever provided, and as such I could not vote on it.
Can this be sued? It's a MASSIVE conflict of interest for all court members, and Casey as Solicitor General as well.
J-Mads- Posts : 1024
Join date : 2009-07-31
Age : 33
Location : Your mother's a whore
Re: CR3- Judiciary Act of Year 22; Hanna (LAW)
Actually, the 28th Amendment passed the power of Solicitor General to the Vice President of the United States.
Last edited by The Prez on Mon Jan 25, 2010 10:31 pm; edited 1 time in total
Re: CR3- Judiciary Act of Year 22; Hanna (LAW)
Well still, the Chief Justice can simply not hear the case, but his conflict of interest makes that unfair. If it WAS heard, all 3 votes would be compromised by self interest.
By the way, since we have no lower Courts of appeals, shouldn't our Court have to hear ALL cases? The Supreme Court can only deny hearing a case because a ruling had already been made. To have court cases dismissed without a ruling in ether direction seems truly un-American.
By the way, since we have no lower Courts of appeals, shouldn't our Court have to hear ALL cases? The Supreme Court can only deny hearing a case because a ruling had already been made. To have court cases dismissed without a ruling in ether direction seems truly un-American.
J-Mads- Posts : 1024
Join date : 2009-07-31
Age : 33
Location : Your mother's a whore
Similar topics
» CR8- Judiciary Act; Wachob (LAW)
» Senator Hanna Is Gay
» Hanna Plan
» 1 USAGS 10: Hanna v. Epp
» 1 USAGS 21: Hanna v. Epp
» Senator Hanna Is Gay
» Hanna Plan
» 1 USAGS 10: Hanna v. Epp
» 1 USAGS 21: Hanna v. Epp
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
|
|