United States Constitution
•
by Platonic
Right. Thought I'd actually post this. Nave seems to be afk, so I'm not getting much from him, but if enough congressmen post here that they'll agree to it I'll put it in the Contracts section anyways.
Constitution of the United States of America
We, the Congress and President of the United States of America, by the power invested in us by our Citizens and Constituents, do hereby validate this Constitution of Laws and Premises by which to better govern our Country. This Constitution is to be held sacred as the ultimate legal contract of our Nation : No one citizen, regardless of personal power, wealth, or influence, shall be considered exempt, nor shall any citizen ever be denied his rights and privileges as described herein.
I. INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS
i. Definitions: A “citizen” is defined as a person or persons who has been born in the United States or has lived in the United States for thirty (30) days. Any person or persons having moved to the United States with the intention of living permanently shall be defined as an “immigrant” until he/she has lived in the country for the required time. Both citizens and immigrants may be defined as the collective term of “residents” of the United States.
1. All residents of the United States are considered equal in worth. No resident shall ever be denied his basic right of Free Speech, regardless of its content. Furthermore, it is the duty of the United States Government to protect and defend the right to free speech of its citizens, regardless of foreign interests.
2. All residents may have recourse to a fair and speedy trial as defined in section II, regardless of the nature of his/her crime. All residents have the right to an attorney and citizens may ask to have one appointed and paid for by the State, if he/she feels he/she may not adequately defend himself.
3. This constitution shall be considered a regulatory document, not a permissible one. As such, any and all rights not specified in this constitution are considered to be rights of the people unless legislated by the appropriate authorities.
II. JUDICIAL SYSTEM
1. Outline
The Judicial system of the United States is a balance of Judicial Entities and Federal powers enforced by the peer jury system and the monojudicial system. Under the Judicial System, all states comprising 20 or more active citizens (“active” as defined as having voted in the past mayoral election) are classified as their own judicial entities. States with under 20 active citizens may be grouped together at the discretion of the President until the active citizen threshold is passed. Should a judicial entity be comprised of multiple states, the mayors of said states shall appoint one of their own to be the Representative of the Judicial Entity. Should the mayors not be able to reach a consensus, one may be appointed by the President. A Representative shall be in power until he steps down, is voted out of his office, or is impeached (see III, 2)
2. Constitution of Courts
a. All judicial entities are responsible for enforcing any and all civil infractions as defined in (II, 4). Civil courts shall consist of one defending attorney, one prosecuting attorney as appointed by the Mayor, one judge, and five residents of the judicial entity acting as jury. The jury shall be chosen at random by the judge but may not participate if they are directly involved in the trial at hand. Should a juror be deemed unfit for duty by the judge, he must re-select until the required amount of jurors has been reached. In a Juror court, a verdict must be agreed upon by at least four of the five jurors. If a verdict of guilty is found, a sentence is pronounced by the Judge. Should four jurors be unable to reach a consensus, the judge may declare a “hung jury” and may either re-pick five new jurors or proceed to a monojudicial court.
b. Federal juror courts are similar to civil courts with the exception that jurors are selected on a country-wide basis and not state-wide. The prosecuting attorney is appointed by a Federal Official (chosen at the discretion of the President).
c. A monojudicial court consists of a defense attorney, a prosecuting attorney (appointed by either the Representative or the Federal Official depending on whether the infraction is civil or federal) and a judge deemed appropriately educated in the field. Monojudicial courts are to be held if either of the following conditions are met: Should the trial at hand be considered by the State to be too complicated or intricate for the layman to be able to made an educated and informed decision, or should the Judge be unable to find the necessary unbiased jurors to proceed with a juror court. In a monojudicial court, both the verdict and the sentence shall be decided upon and delivered by the judge.
3. Sentences
Possible sentences delivered by the judge may be the following:
a. A civil case may conclude with a fine, the amount of which may be decided upon by the judge but may not exceed fifty percent of the defendant’s total worth. The judge may also request a deportation certificate from the Federal Official should he deem the accused a danger to his fellow citizens or a repeat offender.
b. A federal case may conclude with a fine which may not exceed seventy-five percent of the defendant’s total worth, temporary suspension of privileges afforded to the individual, and/or temporary or permanent deportation. Should the case involve a government official, the judge may also recommend a speedy impeachment (see III, 2).
4. Infractions
Because of the fluid nature of law and order, as well as human morality, no law shall be declared permanent other than the rights outlined in Section I. Rather, infractions shall be handled on a case by case basis. If a citizen feels he/she has been wronged by another citizen or organization, he/she may sue for damages by appealing to the local judge. This shall commence proceedings for a civil trial. If a mayor, acting as the will of his state presses charges, the case shall be deemed a federal one. However, if during a juror trial 3 jurors consider the trial to be frivolous, the case shall be dismissed and a fine levied against the plaintiff that shall not exceed one fifth of the plaintiff’s total worth. During a monojudicial trial it is the judge’s right to consider a case frivolous. Judges may also consider precedent a valid argument during a trial.
5. Government Representation.
The head of any governmental body may press charges as the organization proper. If the organization is a Federal one, the case shall be handled on a federal level. If it is a State organization, it shall be handled on a civil level. Managers may also represent the will of their companies in court.
III. CONGRESSIONAL POWERS
Beyond the powers inherent in Congress, the Governmental body is also entitled to the following:
1. Any five members of Congress may propose legislation. Congress may pass with a 2/3rds majority any federal legislation or law that shall be defended by a federal court. Any bill passed in this manner may be vetoed by the President. Should a bill be vetoed, it must again pass through congress and receive a 3/4ths majority in order to override the veto. The same process applies for amending any existing legislation.
2. Congress may impeach any government official, regardless of standing in the government. To impeach an official, five members of Congress must approve the movement. From there, 3/4ths of Congress must approve of the impeachment for the impeachment to be declared valid. If a movement to impeach is brought on as a result of a trial as outlined in (II,3,b), it shall be considered a “speedy impeachment” and must be passed by half of congress in order to be validated. Should the congressman proposing the impeachment also be able to prove the defendant’s inactivity, they may motion for an “impeachment due to inactivity” which may be passed by 2/3rds of congress in order to be valid. Should the defendant in question be a Congressman, his vote is negated for the process of his impeachment.
3. Congress may amend any part of this Constitution so long as it receives 3/4ths majority approval.
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
This is a good start. I like your definition of a citizen. Is there a way we can make it so that only citizens can vote in elections? I feel this is needed to protect our national interests.
Will the admin actually make it so that this can be put into place? Items such as these ideas for congressional proposals as well as citizen voting rules would require changes to the underlying game mechanics.
This is a suitable constitution for now, although I\'m sure it will need some amending later. It will work though and therefore I\'ll agree to it.
/signs
I agree Archibald, I\'d like to see it set to where only citizens could vote, however I feel that it would be difficult to get admin to implement that.
Umm... rarely from you.
When Is tarted reading I was in support because of the whole voting restriction but one i got to the thing on trials I just looked at the length of this thing and stopped. This Constitution could really be slimmed down. We dont need to have trials as there are not really any crimes to commit at this time and we certainly would not have attorneys for the state to pay for.
I might read all of it at a later time but I think some parts that don\' pertain to Erepublik should be cut out..
i doubt you can convince admin to sign it because of the 30 days penalty before voting. I thinkt the voting amendament is contrary to one of the TEN.
PS: i got my self one law rejected so I know how they feel about some issues.
archibal and esoom are among those who support the discrimination and social segregation, is quite clear that they want to propose that foreigners are unable to vote if you communicate with the administrator to restrict our vote as foreigners, we will do us well and a little investigating whether managers of the game are not Americans are Hispanic.
archibal and esoom son unos de los que apoyan la discriminacion y segregacion social, es muy claro que quieren proponer que los extranjeros no tengan la posibilidad de votar, si ustedes se comunican con el administrador para restringir nuestro voto como extranjeros, nosotros tambien lo haremos y si investigan un poquito los administradores del juego no son americanos son hispanos.
So wait...
I\'m not a citizen? 0_o
Will, unless I\'m much mistaken, you were born in the USA, so you are a citizen. It\'s right there in Section I.
And I know they\'re not going to restrict voting. Not out of the principle of the thing, of course, but because it\'s too much work for them. That\'s why I didn\'t include it anywhere.
While the Judicial Entities is unrealistic for the United States\' current population, it will work wonderfully in the future as our population grows. It is for that general reason why I support this Constitution. Fantastic job, Plat. Expect an email from me soon.
Awesome. I\'ll read this later
I purposely havent commented on this as I havent read completely through it, but here\'s some initial thoughts and responses to some of the earlier comments.
In the definitions section, I think it is given that in section I that citizens are treated as residents as defined, but I think it should be stated (ie it says that all residents are due this or that, whereaas it does not define where residents and citizens and residents are the same thing).
As far as the judiciary system, I think it\'s set up fairly well, but I am not sure we\'re equipped to implement it. I can agree that it relies on Mayors, Presidents, and citizens (choosing, appointing counsel, etc) most people may not want to pay attorneys and I am not sure there are enough citizens that could handle such responsibilities (although it would add another side to the eWorld). If there\'s enough support for it we can certainly try it.
On the technical side the updates disappear rather quickly, so outside of having some sort of immigration office to record the dates of arrival for \"residents\" I am not sure there\'s a way to prove when they came to the US. Furthermore, I am not exactly sure we could differentiate between the two, and I do not know if there\'s necessarily a need to at this point.
Interesting piece altogether, although I would like to see term limits, and more definitions to what the Presidential powers are.
I don\'t think we are large enough to implement the legal system, either. To be honest, we have approximately 10-35 active citizens in the US. Everyone else is either a multi or a dead account. When I read this (a long time ago 😉), I just thought it would end up being Platonic doing everything.
@Dish: No presidential power limitations. Term limit is 3.
The small amount of active users is why I added the minimum population limit of 20 to courts: so that it\'s auto-correcting. If there are only 20 active people in the US, then there is only one court system. If/when more people join, then the system gets sub-divided into two courts. More people, more devisions, until every state is big enough to have their own court.
See? Plat\'s smart. He thinks of these things.
wow this looks very familiar to the one I sent over to Ben Dover just a fews days ago. Looks like you and I platonic are on the same wave length
Peace and Pecans
Dnouser
*shocked*. I think I am speechless. I actually dont know what I want to say to that.
I agree, it\'s a good start, but you only mentioned congressional powers. What about mayors and presidents? They\'re mysteriously left out
Presidents have enough power as is. They propose stuff, are essentially the Fed, veto legislative proposals, and propose war declarations. Essentially everything that they do in real world politics. As to mayors, they essentially become the judicial branch in the thing.
And dish, to whom are you referring?
Platonic, I think Emerick meant limitations too.
Dnouser, I sent that Constitution to Nave.
Cool it looks like they are pretty close in language.
@Platonic: I was referring to Dnouser saying that you thought on the same wave length. I cannot relate because you are, well, unique.
Aw, huggles all around.
signs
Hmmm.I will base something off of this,
wowow
Who\'s that?
Also, Benn\'s right Plat. There\'s a definite lack of checks and balances besides impeachment
First off Platonic-thank you for writing this. I think it is an excellent constitution. And contrary to some people I think that it is on the shorter side rather than too long. I\'m not criticizing its length at all but I do feel we\'ll need to add more items later on (and that shall happen in good time).
In response to DesertFalcon\'s claim that there are no crimes in Erep to be judged I disagree. There have been plenty of crimes around here...people have stolen monies from governmental accounts and companies, foreigners have flocked to other nations to spoil elections, others have hacked into accounts (not that I think that particular crime is going to be easily prosecuted within our proposed judicial system), and there have been \'gray\' type of business practices implemented. Plenty of e-crime to go around.
I sign and agree to this constitution.
Although not an american citizen, I must compliment the interesting text presented. Good work.
Although I\'m not American, I noticed one think I believe it\'s a mistake, as it could be misunderstood.
I believe the definition of Citizen should be \"(...) 30 days or more (...)\" as someone willing to escape the law could simply say that he was an immigrant once he had been living in the e-USA for 31 days 🙂
I didn\'t read the whole thing, but be aware that subjective laws are not recommended.. I\'m sure you know that, after all is a small mistake... 🙂
Cheers, and keep up the good work.. 😉
Although I\'m not American, I noticed one think I believe it\'s a mistake, as it could be misunderstood.
I believe the definition of Citizen should be \"(...) 30 days or more (...)\" as someone willing to escape the law could simply say that he was an immigrant once he had been living in the e-USA for 31 days 🙂
I didn\'t read the whole thing, but be aware that subjective laws are not recommended.. I\'m sure you know that, after all is a small mistake... 🙂
Cheers, and keep up the good work.. 😉