|
Post by Owen Edwards on Jan 24, 2008 3:07:49 GMT -6
WHEREAS when a man and a woman love one another very much, children may be produced;
WHEREAS such men and such women may be Talossans;
WHEREAS the children may fall through a "loophole", by being born before citizenship, or during a period of renunciation;
WHEREAS this is a glaring error in the process of creating Dandelions;
THEREFORE, by application via the Immigration Minister from a Talossan, a petition for a minor who is under their care to be granted Dandelion status may be heard, without any probationary period beforehand, and shall be processed like any other citizenship petition.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Jan 24, 2008 3:29:42 GMT -6
This is a tough call... XVIII.1 would indicate that this is organic, but I believe the specificity of XVIII.7 would supersede.
"Children born after 1 January 1989/X, one (or both) of whose biological or adoptive parents is a Talossan citizen at the time of the birth, are native-born Talossan citizens ("Dandelions") and shall automatically have full voting rights when they register themselves with the Minister of Immigration on or after their 14th birthday. Notification shall consist of writing a "What Talossa Means to Me" Essay."
This would seem to define the status of Dandelion pretty specifically, as one who had a parent(s) who was a Talossan citizen at the time of their birth. I am not sure, however, if your law would be considered to be in contradiction to this, or an addition. I suspect the former, however, due to the very specific language calling Dandelions "native-born Talossans."
I would suggest that, to circumvent this entire problem, you simply avoid the issue of Dandelions altogether. "Citizen status, not including voting rights until the minor's 14th birthday has been reached and he has applied to become a full citizen" might be the sort of language used. One downside is that this will complicate the law somewhat, but it can probably endure a little complication. In fact, this bill can be passed immediately, while another bill amending the OrgLaw's language in this section can be authored and repealing this law simultaneously can be worked upon (as it appears the OrgLaw will be scrutinized anyway).
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Jan 24, 2008 13:28:11 GMT -6
The idea of "native-born Talossan" seems dubious, given the loophole concerning adoption (a famously grey area). Surely updating a former Kingdom citizen's "list of children who qualify as Dandelions" is simple sense; equally, in one specific instance, a Talossan in self-imposed political exile, within a Talossan community of a sort, surely parallels in some sense the situation of ex-pats anywher - further children would retain some Talossan nature.
Anyway, stop-gap bill:
WHEREAS when a man and a woman love one another very much, children may be produced;
WHEREAS such men and such women may be Talossans;
WHEREAS the children may fall through a "loophole", by being born before citizenship, or during a period of renunciation;
WHEREAS this is a glaring error in the process of creating Dandelions;
THEREFORE, by application via the Immigration Minister from a Talossan, a petition for a minor who is under their care to be granted citizen status, not including voting rights until the minor's 14th birthday has been reached and he has applied to become a full citizen, may be heard, without any probationary period beforehand, and shall be processed like any other citizenship petition.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Jan 24, 2008 14:17:52 GMT -6
I agree with you, but simple sense and the law are two different things in many cases. So it goes.
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Jan 24, 2008 14:28:30 GMT -6
This is a tough call... XVIII.1 would indicate that this is organic, but I believe the specificity of XVIII.7 would supersede. What an interesting question! I'm not going to commit either way on an answer, but here's an analogy from U.S. law that may be applicable: The U.S. Constitution (in Article III) says that the judicial power is vested in the Supreme Court and such inferior courts as Congress may create, and specifies that the judges of those inferior courts serve during good behaviour. However, Congress has created "courts" (like the bankruptcy courts, tax courts, and military courts) with "judges" that serve for fixed terms. The Supreme Court has ruled that since Congress has the power to create administrative agencies that apply regulations, etc., it can call them courts and make them look and feel like courts if it wants to, as long as they don't do the things that are committed to courts under the Constitution unless they comply with the requirements of Article III. So there are two fundamentally different kinds of "courts" in the U.S., those that are constitutionally defined and those that are purely created by statute.
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Jan 24, 2008 14:29:56 GMT -6
I agree with you, but simple sense and the law are two different things in many cases. So it goes. Indeed. Welcome to the world of "legal fiction."
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Jan 24, 2008 15:04:03 GMT -6
I agree with you, but simple sense and the law are two different things in many cases. So it goes. Indeed. Welcome to the world of "legal fiction." Hey, I'm gunning for the bar as soon as the test is administered. Your analogous situation in the U.S. is sound, but I should indicate that it actually happens to support the inorganicity of the above first draft of the law. Note that it was ruled by those scholars of jurisprudence in our neighbor that as long as that which was not reserved to the court system was not used, Congress could call them "courts." Here we have a case of the specific definition of "Dandelion" being given, and a law which would assign that qualification to a set of people who do not fit that definition. It is not adjacent to the definition, it countermands it with additional members of the group. The main point, I suppose, is that there is a very strong case for the law being inorganic, and inasmuch as we are all dedicated to preserving the Organic Law abovemost, we should probably take the route of wisdom rather than simplicity.
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Jan 24, 2008 15:36:44 GMT -6
Your analogous situation in the U.S. is sound, but I should indicate that it actually happens to support the inorganicity of the above first draft of the law. Note that it was ruled by those scholars of jurisprudence in our neighbor that as long as that which was not reserved to the court system was not used, Congress could call them "courts." Here we have a case of the specific definition of "Dandelion" being given, and a law which would assign that qualification to a set of people who do not fit that definition. It is not adjacent to the definition, it countermands it with additional members of the group. Maybe. There's a question whether the substance of Dandelion status under section 7 is any different from what the Ziu is allowed to do under section 1. If not, maybe the section 7 definition is a floor and not a ceiling on the scope of "Dandelion" (e.g., "whatever else the Ziu decides to do with its naturalisation laws, at least this class of people is entitled to citizenship as Dandelions"). The reason it's important to distinguish between Article I courts and Article III courts in U.S. law is that giving Article III powers to Article I courts would raise very big separation of powers concerns.
|
|
|
Post by Dréu Gavárþic'h on Jan 24, 2008 16:42:56 GMT -6
The idea of "native-born Talossan" seems dubious, given the loophole concerning adoption (a famously grey area). Surely updating a former Kingdom citizen's "list of children who qualify as Dandelions" is simple sense; equally, in one specific instance, a Talossan in self-imposed political exile, within a Talossan community of a sort, surely parallels in some sense the situation of ex-pats anywher - further children would retain some Talossan nature. Anyway, stop-gap bill: WHEREAS when a man and a woman love one another very much, children may be produced; WHEREAS such men and such women may be Talossans; WHEREAS the children may fall through a "loophole", by being born before citizenship, or during a period of renunciation; WHEREAS this is a glaring error in the process of creating Dandelions; THEREFORE, by application via the Immigration Minister from a Talossan, a petition for a minor who is under their care to be granted citizen status, not including voting rights until the minor's 14th birthday has been reached and he has applied to become a full citizen, may be heard, without any probationary period beforehand, and shall be processed like any other citizenship petition. Much better Owen! I only have one problem here. "and shall be processed like any other citizenship petition" does this mean we are going to put those kids on witt and interrogate them? I would think it much better if it was a simple petition that could be seconded and thirded. Without actually putting the kid on witt.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Jan 24, 2008 16:52:23 GMT -6
Hm. There may be a better way of solving this issue, or at least alternate wording.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2008 17:25:22 GMT -6
The idea of "native-born Talossan" seems dubious, given the loophole concerning adoption (a famously grey area). Surely updating a former Kingdom citizen's "list of children who qualify as Dandelions" is simple sense; equally, in one specific instance, a Talossan in self-imposed political exile, within a Talossan community of a sort, surely parallels in some sense the situation of ex-pats anywher - further children would retain some Talossan nature. Anyway, stop-gap bill: WHEREAS when a man and a woman love one another very much, children may be produced; WHEREAS such men and such women may be Talossans; WHEREAS the children may fall through a "loophole", by being born before citizenship, or during a period of renunciation; WHEREAS this is a glaring error in the process of creating Dandelions; THEREFORE, by application via the Immigration Minister from a Talossan, a petition for a minor who is under their care to be granted citizen status, not including voting rights until the minor's 14th birthday has been reached and he has applied to become a full citizen, may be heard, without any probationary period beforehand, and shall be processed like any other citizenship petition. Much better Owen! I only have one problem here. "and shall be processed like any other citizenship petition" does this mean we are going to put those kids on witt and interrogate them? I would think it much better if it was a simple petition that could be seconded and thirded. Without actually putting the kid on witt. Interesting you used the word interrogate...
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Jan 24, 2008 17:27:18 GMT -6
Let's not start that one up again. The voters have spoken, we can let it go.
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Jan 24, 2008 18:08:33 GMT -6
Did not intend a child to appear on Witt, Dreu - but will make it clearer.
THIRD DRAFT:
WHEREAS when a man and a woman love one another very much, children may be produced;
WHEREAS such men and such women may be Talossans;
WHEREAS the children may fall through a "loophole", by being born before citizenship, or during a period of renunciation;
WHEREAS this is a glaring error in the process of creating Dandelions;
THEREFORE, by application via the Immigration Minister from a Talossan, a petition for a minor who is under their care to be granted citizen status`- not including voting rights until the minor's 14th birthday has been reached and he has applied to become a full citizen`- may be heard, without any probationary period beforehand, and shall require a seconder and thirder for the petition, before being submitted to the normal authorities.
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Jan 25, 2008 14:43:05 GMT -6
Another draft:
WHEREAS when a man and a woman love one another very much, children may be produced;
WHEREAS such men and such women may be Talossans;
WHEREAS the children may fall through a "loophole", by being born before their parent's citizenship, or during a period of their parent's renunciation or removal of citizenship;
WHEREAS this is a glaring error in the process of handling the citizenship of children within Talossa, as there is no real reason why such children should not have rights as Talossans;
THEREFORE, it is resolved that, until such time as the Organic Law undergoes the proposed thorough review, the following measures be put into place:
1) A Talossan may petition for citizenship on behalf of any of their non-Dandelion children who are under the age of 14, without any probationary period, in the traditional manner of making petitions for citizenship.
2) Upon being seconded, thirded and so forth in the traditional manner, and assuming that no objection is brought, a limited form of citizenship shall be granted to the subject of the petition, who shall be known as a "Daisy", a term carrying in all other ways the legal status and implications of "Dandelion".
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Jan 25, 2008 14:58:22 GMT -6
2) Upon being seconded, thirded and so forth in the traditional manner, and assuming that no objection is brought, a limited form of citizenship shall be granted to the subject of the petition, who shall be known as a "Daisy", a term carrying in all other ways the legal status and implications of "Dandelion". It's tempting to refer to members of this new class of junior citizens as "Catsears." The catsear, or cat's ear, being a flowering plant known as the "false dandelion" due to its close resemblance to the genuine article.
|
|