FruitsZ
|
  |
| Joined: 22 Jan 2013 |
| Total Posts: 25722 |
|
|
| 15 Dec 2014 03:55 PM |
"Neither House, during the session of Congress, shall, do business at any other place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting, unless by way of forum or other method deemed acceptable by the Supreme Court."
> SC don't need to tell us where we can have our meeting, this is power they DON'T NEED, and have no reason to have.
"One third shall constitute a quorum to do business if that business is the approval of a Vice President or a Supreme Court Justice."
> Once again, VP nor does the SC have any reason to give us the approval to do so. This doesn't even need to be added if quorum is 1/3. Quorum = How many congressman we need to have a session.
"SECTION 4. The Supreme Court shall have the power to review any action of the legislative and executive branch at any time by a majority vote of the Justices. They may overturn any law, executive order, or other action if they find it illegal, unconstitutional, or unlawful"
> Ok let's just get rid of checks and balances. This means that the SC can look at anything we do, and say "nope you can't do that", even if it is good change. So say the Supreme Court gets out of hand and attempts to remove all Congressman, wait this constitution gives them the power to do so! "Other action", this means they can bail out their friends from impeachment, and once again gets rid of checks and balances. This action can even mean a motion.
"SECTION 6. While the federal courts are struggling, Supreme Court Justices can ride circuits and perform the regular duties of a federal judge, in addition to their regular responsibilities."
> The Supreme Court is the high court of the United States, if the FJ's are lacking to do their duties, then that needs to be handled by Congress, who can impeach the inactive FJ's.
"SECTION 8. The Supreme Court may with a ⅔ vote expel a member of the Supreme Court if they find him unfit or unable in his duties."
> Can just remove anyone they don't like, and only need a 2/3 of vote, which means that it only takes 6 justices to agree, to say no to the guy. Means this SC member can't even go up to someone and say why they aren't guility of what they did. Which in a impeachment process, they are granted. Let's just get rid of impeachment process!
"SECTION 1. The Congress, publicly on a forum, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the approval of the Supreme Court or the entire Federal Court, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress." "As such, only Congressional Committees who pass a legislative subpoena, a Federal Judge, or Supreme Court Justice may order a group to hand over Audit Log information, or personal transactions"
> This section does not specify which one you have to choose, so if the SC say they want to take charge of the approving of this amendment, they can. They can deny any amendment they don't like or want. They could also say no to any amendment that threatens their power.
EXCUSE ANY GRAMMAR/SPELLING MISTAKES.
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
iComrade
|
  |
| Joined: 10 Nov 2012 |
| Total Posts: 1139 |
|
|
| 15 Dec 2014 03:56 PM |
| no more SCJ vs Congress wars please |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Dec 2014 03:57 PM |
Support. Ryanrevan and Jcmand, the two most power-hungry creeps in the government at the moment, are destroying Congress and giving so many powers to the Supreme Court that it actually has more power over Congress.
rossb654mail || i'm right you know |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Dec 2014 04:00 PM |
I agree w/ ross.
[>S100]> FC, USA |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
FruitsZ
|
  |
| Joined: 22 Jan 2013 |
| Total Posts: 25722 |
|
|
| 15 Dec 2014 04:02 PM |
There wouldn't be a war, if everything remain the same.
SC does not have power to review amendments in real life, and shouldn't have any in this constitution.
ASwell as taking over the role of FJ. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Dec 2014 04:03 PM |
no one cares, fruit
u got dethroned |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Dec 2014 04:08 PM |
@ross 4 once, I agree with you
A very swagalicious muffin |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 15 Dec 2014 04:32 PM |
No support. I can see your point, though. But overall, Congress has gotten out of control as well, and since the Executive branch basically has no say in that, we need one branch to do something, and the only other branch is the Judicial branch.
get speonk'd m8 |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
jcmand
|
  |
| Joined: 17 Jan 2010 |
| Total Posts: 3959 |
|
|
| 15 Dec 2014 04:36 PM |
""Neither House, during the session of Congress, shall, do business at any other place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting, unless by way of forum or other method deemed acceptable by the Supreme Court."
> SC don't need to tell us where we can have our meeting, this is power they DON'T NEED, and have no reason to have."
This means if we want to use trello or something, the SC need to sign off on this since it is outside of ROBLOX.
""One third shall constitute a quorum to do business if that business is the approval of a Vice President or a Supreme Court Justice."
> Once again, VP nor does the SC have any reason to give us the approval to do so. This doesn't even need to be added if quorum is 1/3. Quorum = How many congressman we need to have a session."
No no no, this means if we are approving a vp or scj candidate we need 1/3 to approve them.
""SECTION 4. The Supreme Court shall have the power to review any action of the legislative and executive branch at any time by a majority vote of the Justices. They may overturn any law, executive order, or other action if they find it illegal, unconstitutional, or unlawful"
> Ok let's just get rid of checks and balances. This means that the SC can look at anything we do, and say "nope you can't do that", even if it is good change. So say the Supreme Court gets out of hand and attempts to remove all Congressman, wait this constitution gives them the power to do so! "Other action", this means they can bail out their friends from impeachment, and once again gets rid of checks and balances. This action can even mean a motion."
This already exists. This is the judicial review.
Jcmand || Vice President of the United States |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
jkoscar02
|
  |
| Joined: 23 Jun 2009 |
| Total Posts: 1547 |
|
|
| 15 Dec 2014 04:46 PM |
| Jcmand, you have not addressed the fact that the Supreme Court now has overreaching powers into the impeachment process which is handled by Congress. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
kevin12cd
|
  |
| Joined: 02 Jul 2009 |
| Total Posts: 1533 |
|
|
| 15 Dec 2014 05:43 PM |
| must admit, well written and impressive. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
FruitsZ
|
  |
| Joined: 22 Jan 2013 |
| Total Posts: 25722 |
|
|
| 15 Dec 2014 05:45 PM |
"Neither House, during the session of Congress, shall, do business at any other place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting, unless by way of forum or other method deemed acceptable by the Supreme Court."
> SC don't need to tell us where we can have our meeting, this is power they DON'T NEED, and have no reason to have."
This means if we want to use trello or something, the SC need to sign off on this since it is outside of ROBLOX.
- Trello won't be needed to be used, and once again.. SC don't need any business. As long as we meet Quorum and can provide proof, we are good.
""One third shall constitute a quorum to do business if that business is the approval of a Vice President or a Supreme Court Justice."
> Once again, VP nor does the SC have any reason to give us the approval to do so. This doesn't even need to be added if quorum is 1/3. Quorum = How many congressman we need to have a session."
No no no, this means if we are approving a vp or scj candidate we need 1/3 to approve them.
We don't need to have two quorums. 2/5 is already good enough.
""SECTION 4. The Supreme Court shall have the power to review any action of the legislative and executive branch at any time by a majority vote of the Justices. They may overturn any law, executive order, or other action if they find it illegal, unconstitutional, or unlawful"
> Ok let's just get rid of checks and balances. This means that the SC can look at anything we do, and say "nope you can't do that", even if it is good change. So say the Supreme Court gets out of hand and attempts to remove all Congressman, wait this constitution gives them the power to do so! "Other action", this means they can bail out their friends from impeachment, and once again gets rid of checks and balances. This action can even mean a motion."
This already exists. This is the judicial review.
Judicial review is only based off of laws that we pass, not impeachment process's. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Dec 2014 05:46 PM |
Ah, Congress at its best. Wanting to be the only source of power in the United States and gets mad when another thing gets power.
get speonk'd m8 |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
FruitsZ
|
  |
| Joined: 22 Jan 2013 |
| Total Posts: 25722 |
|
|
| 15 Dec 2014 05:50 PM |
how are we mad?
so you want the supreme court to be in charge of impeachments
and can say no to anyone they dont want impeachment
even if that person deserves impeachment
and congress and no one else, can do anything about it?
lmao |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
UnScripth
|
  |
| Joined: 11 Oct 2012 |
| Total Posts: 85 |
|
|
| 15 Dec 2014 06:34 PM |
I vote Congress and SC stop being babies.
We don't need this new constitution.
It's BOTH of their fault there is this war.
I say let them fight on.
Shows how much they care for USA.
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Paracosm
|
  |
| Joined: 25 May 2012 |
| Total Posts: 29395 |
|
| |
|
UnScripth
|
  |
| Joined: 11 Oct 2012 |
| Total Posts: 85 |
|
|
| 15 Dec 2014 06:48 PM |
| I stopped caring after "As big of an idiot Fruits is" |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Paracosm
|
  |
| Joined: 25 May 2012 |
| Total Posts: 29395 |
|
| |
|
|
| 15 Dec 2014 07:39 PM |
Not everything is perfect the first time and that is why this constitution is going to congress for Debate, Changes, and Additions. The reason why we want the 2/3rds to expel our own members is because Congress can only use the inactivity clause when they break the one month rule. There are several SCJ's who do the bare minimum (one thing a month) to prevent them from being impeached by that inactivity clause. I refuse to let people get impeached just because they are not liked and I will make a promise that as long as I am a SCJ if that is a reason why there is an impeachment then I will nay the impeachment. For far to long has this SC been inactive. If this USA group wants to fully function and stop butting heads then every branch needs to be active. I think if everyone is active then there will be less confrontation amongst the branches. Sen. Fruitsz I look forward to working with you on changing or improving this constitution. There are some parts of the constitution I myself do not find necessary but just like in the real life Congress. You have to give a little to get a little. PM me so we can work together.
Supreme Court Justice Sufferpoop |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Dec 2014 08:08 PM |
| This is America! Your jobs are worthless. If the government had no internal conflict or rogue agents, you'd all think the world would be perfect. But in reality, you'd get bored and just say screw it and leave. That's why we love America! We can create problems, and watch other people whine about it only for some high monarch to deem a winner. And then, the cycle repeats itself. But, play the game by all means. Be the good little soldier that the HR's want you to so they can make some money. I'm all for it. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
EmperorD
|
  |
| Joined: 31 Jan 2012 |
| Total Posts: 386 |
|
|
| 15 Dec 2014 08:31 PM |
Support
"Intellectuals solve problems, geniuses prevent them." |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Dec 2014 08:44 PM |
| There's people that don't like it, and there's people that do like it. We should do a vote on this new constitution. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
oofive2
|
  |
| Joined: 08 May 2011 |
| Total Posts: 1608 |
|
|
| 16 Dec 2014 05:38 AM |
| Wait. How can this even go into play yet? Congress has to decide on it? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|