Bill: Accepted Judicial Expansion Act

Discussion in 'Accepted Bills' started by xEndeavour, Oct 13, 2019.

?

How do you vote?

Poll closed Oct 16, 2019.
  1. Aye

    100.0%
  2. Nay

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. xEndeavour

    xEndeavour Citizen Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2019
    Messages:
    388
    kbooth1102
    - Title: Judicial Expansion Act
    - Type: Creation
    - Reasoning: To better the relations between Government branches, I propose that the Judiciary act as an 'umpire' in disputes over implemented bills. This means that if there was ever another dispute over whose jurisdiction is what, implemented laws, policies, and rules can be reviewed by the courts to check if they were passed by Cabinet or Parliament legally. This would minimise any argument between government branches on the matter of jurisdiction. It would provide a constitutional court to make sure the cabinet and parliament are following the law when they implement law, rules, and policies. It would also add an aspect to the courts role, beyond criminal cases.
    - Bill: Ministers and MPs will be able to challenge 'unconstitutional' legislation in the courts. All 3 judges, after doing their own investigating, would need to deliver a verdict on the legality of the law, and the majority decision would stand. This would result in either an act of parliament or cabinet decision being ruled invalid or valid. The court can only review laws that have been challenged by the MP or Minister. This lawsuit would be titled "[Player] vs Government".
    Open to feedback. If you are confused, just ask and I'm happy to explain it further. Acknowledgements to the Parliament who helped put this together, notably @TheMightyZulf.