court case: killing the veto - Page 2

MJW · January 4, 2003, 19:10

I am moving to suspend hearing untill the will of the senate is known. Realize that the senate did not bring this case up, only a few senetors, who can not speak for all the senate.
MMS

i think that only the law matters not the will of most of the people.

The below post by skywalker might cause a flamewar...

Kuciwalker · January 4, 2003, 19:54

ManicStarSeed - YOU ARE MISSING THE POINT! Yes, the Senate may pass another bill countermanding the one that stands. SO WHAT? THEY CAN ALWAYS DO THAT! However, it is not a CERTAINTY that they will, and anyway, for a short period of time the bill WILL be law. You can't hold up a court proceeding just so that by the time it is held it is pointless.

The point of this case is to a) get rid of the veto, because it WAS illegal, in that it VIOLATED THE LAW (whether or not this can be rendered inconsiquential is irrelevant; it is still illegal) and b) set a precedent.

ManicStarSeed, if you are not going to represent the defendent then SHUT UP. You are not involved in the case.

adaMada · January 4, 2003, 20:13

skywalker,
Perhaps it's been a while since you've checked, but ManicStarSeed is a member of the cabinent. As such, until the Cabinent decides who shall represent them, he is a defendent. Your case is that the Cabinet broke a law by passing the veto late -- making the Cabinet itself the defendant. MSS is trying to make a case that the court may rule the veto invalid but no law has been broken. As long as you reject that idea, you are making him the defendant.

I'm always happy to hear any opinion -- but I dislike it when people insult others needlessly because they disagree. It's especially irksome when they are incorrect in their insulting.

-- adaMada

EDIT: I've just realized that this is perhaps the only post I've ever made in the public Civ-3 forum that was angry. I regret that -- I dislike angry posts, both from myself and others. Having said that, I won't take the post down out of respect for others. Though I'm still angry enough to believe he deserves it, I do apologize to skywalker, and I also apologize to the court, cabinent, and MJW. My outburst was uncalled for.

Kuciwalker · January 4, 2003, 20:54

oops

I'm sorry ManicStarSeed.

I'm also sorry for the harsh nature of my post. I apologize.

MJW · January 4, 2003, 22:57

Togas can we make an offical court theard now, where skywalker will be the plantiff?

Togas · January 5, 2003, 04:10

The Court has acknowledged the case and will take it up. Right now we're trying to decide who will be the Cheif Justice for this case. We should know by Sunday.

--Togas

Panag · January 5, 2003, 15:03

Quote:

Originally posted by MJW
It was challged for a different reason.... read the thread panag!

hi ,

read all the things that happend , ..... MJW (!)

this matter should be regarded as closed so whats the point of going on with this , ....

have a nice day in court

Panag · January 5, 2003, 15:05

Quote:

Originally posted by skywalker
ManicStarSeed - YOU ARE MISSING THE POINT! Yes, the Senate may pass another bill countermanding the one that stands. SO WHAT? THEY CAN ALWAYS DO THAT! However, it is not a CERTAINTY that they will, and anyway, for a short period of time the bill WILL be law. You can't hold up a court proceeding just so that by the time it is held it is pointless.

The point of this case is to a) get rid of the veto, because it WAS illegal, in that it VIOLATED THE LAW (whether or not this can be rendered inconsiquential is irrelevant; it is still illegal) and b) set a precedent.

ManicStarSeed, if you are not going to represent the defendent then SHUT UP. You are not involved in the case.

hi ,

if MSS is not involved then the same could be mentioned about a lot of others , .....

have a nice day

Kuciwalker · January 5, 2003, 15:08

panag - yes, I was, wrong about that, however, I AM THE PLAINTIFF.

MJW · January 5, 2003, 21:16

The law is not that bad because we would have a perfect railnet and all units at anytime can go anywhere at once. And the handful of rouged native workers can just be added to create tempoary speacialists.

Togas · January 5, 2003, 23:31

Official Court Thread has been posted. This case is now open, but please continue to use this thread (if you choose) to discuss this matter unofficially.

--Togas

adaMada · January 5, 2003, 23:45

Just in case it got missed before, I'd like to again offer to represent any of the defendants who'd like external representation. I doubt any'd like it, but this is an interesting case, and I'm happy to take it on if they would

.

-- adaMada

adaMada · January 5, 2003, 23:52

Quote:

Originally posted by skywalker
oops

I'm sorry ManicStarSeed.

I'm also sorry for the harsh nature of my post. I apologize.

Again, I'm sorry for the nature of my reply. Let's forgive, forget, and get on with the game

.

-- adaMada

E_T · January 5, 2003, 23:53

Ada, I am concidered a party of interest, as I had voted no for the Veto. But that doesn't mean that I might still need someone to represent me. Would you, If I need it?

E_T

adaMada · January 5, 2003, 23:57

Quote:

Originally posted by E_T
Ada, I am concidered a party of interest, as I had voted no for the Veto. But that doesn't mean that I might still need someone to represent me. Would you, If I need it?

E_T

Yes, gladly, assuming I'm not already representing someone else that would create a conflict of interest. Let me know if you'd like me to do so

.

-- adaMada

E_T · January 6, 2003, 00:24

Sure, I don't think that there will be any conflict of interest. The only difference between me and the other Cabinet Members is that I had Voted No, instead of yes. IFAIK, I'm still technically a defendant....

E_T

adaMada · January 6, 2003, 07:38

Quote:

Originally posted by E_T
Sure, I don't think that there will be any conflict of interest. The only difference between me and the other Cabinet Members is that I had Voted No, instead of yes. IFAIK, I'm still technically a defendant....

E_T

Neither do I think there's a conflict of interest -- but that's obviously your call to make

.

Let me know if/when you feel you need representation, and if you do I'll inform Togas.

-- adaMada

MJW · January 6, 2003, 17:24

If i am a party of interst can i post in the court theard?

GodKing · January 6, 2003, 18:06

MJW - Yes. Feel free to post there. We are awaiting to hear from the plantiff prior to proceeding with any court activities. If you have any questions, feel free to PM Togas (he is supream Justice for this case) or any other judge. We all will gladly answer any questions you may have, however as Togas is running the case, it is probably best to go through him. General discussion can be held to this thread. The other "official" thread is for presenting your case, making motions, and having a fairly organized place to do the "legal thing". we here on the court have been talking a lot lately about reform of how we operate, making the proceedings more open, and so forth. One major thing is that as this is a game, and we are here for fun, we are talking about reducing the formality of the court system. So don't feel like you have to brush up on your latin or anything like that.

GK - Justice.

E_T · January 7, 2003, 00:16

Oh good, I don't have to sign up for Latin 101....

E_T

joncnunn · January 8, 2003, 11:20

Why does the defense argument sound so much like the activist FA & NJ state supreme courts?

MJW · January 8, 2003, 17:28

whats that?!?!?!

Panag · January 9, 2003, 16:27

Quote:

Originally posted by joncnunn
Why does the defense argument sound so much like the activist FA & NJ state supreme courts?

hi ,

cause we hired a lawyer from inside the beltring , .......

have a nice day