Bill: Pending Subversion of Appeals Act

[Darklander]

A
BILL
to

Amend the Judicial Standards Act.​

The people of the Commonwealth of Redmont, through their elected Representatives in the Congress and the force of law ordained to that Congress by the people through the constitution, do hereby enact the following provisions into law:

1 - Short Title and Enactment

(1) This Act may be cited as the ‘Subversion of Appeals Act’.

(2) This Act will be enacted immediately upon its signing into law.

(3) This Act has been authored by the citizens of the WPR Legislation Committee and by Justice Matthew100x.

(4) This Act has been sponsored by Rep. TrueDarklander.

(5) This Act has been co-sponsored by Rep. xEndeavour.

2 - Reasons

(1) At present, no law clearly prohibits individuals from initiating litigation against the Commonwealth of Redmont or its judicial officers for the purpose of challenging, circumventing, or overturning a judicial ruling.

(2) Such filings risk undermining the established appellate process and may result in inconsistent or harmful precedent.

(3) The law must therefore expressly define the limits of permissible challenges to judicial rulings and affirm the authority of the appeals process.

(4) Various sections of the Judicial Standards Act (JSA) are redundant under the Constitution and should be removed from the JSA.

3 - Amendments to the Judicial Standards Act

(1) The Judicial Standards Act shall be amended as follows:
(a) Sections 4 through 12 shall be struck in their entirety.
(b) § 20, now renumbered § 11, shall be amended to read as follows:
“

(1) Once a court case is adjourned, either party may request to appeal the decision by filing an appeal in the court of the next tier. Once a case has been decided by the Supreme Court, it cannot be appealed.
(2) Requirements:--
- Less than one month has elapsed since the court’s decision;
- the appeal follows a format laid out by the courts in a thread that will be authored upon this bill’s passage; and
- the appeal is not made just for the sake of appealing.
(2) No party may bring litigation against the Commonwealth of Redmont, its agencies, or its judicial officers for the sole purpose of overturning, modifying, or otherwise challenging a judicial ruling outside of the lawful appeals process.
(3) Any such filing whose claim is in contradiction with § 11(2) shall be considered outside the jurisdiction of the trial court.
(4) A valid appeal must:—
(a) be filed within one month of the original decision;
(b) conform to the formatting required for appeals set out by the courts; and
(c) present lawful grounds for review.

”
(c) § 22, now renumbered § 13, shall be amended as follows:
“
12 - Appeal Outcome

(1) In the event the court’s original decision was overturned, one of two events will occur.

(a) If the plaintiff had originally won the case and the defendant was charged with compensatory actions, the defendant will be fully refunded by the plaintiff.

(b) If the defendant had originally won the case, the court will decide compensatory actions for the plaintiff to receive.

(2) In the event the court did not overturn their decision, all court orders from the original case remain standing.

12 - Appeal Outcome
(1) Available outcomes for appeals are as follows:

(a) Rejection: The original decision stands, and all court orders from the original case remain standing.

(b) Reverse: The appellate court reverses the lower court’s decision, or part of the decision.

(c) Reverse and Remand: The appellate court reverses the lower court’s decision, or part of the decision, and sends the case back to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with a verdict delivered by the appellate court.

(d) De Novo New Trial: The appellate court finds significant errors in the original trial process that necessitate a completely new trial at the appellate court level.

“
(d) The following Section shall be inserted into the Act following § 23, now renumbered § 12, with the following sections renumbered concurrently:
“

13 - Interlocutory Appeals

(1) A party may petition for an interlocutory appeal to the relevant higher court when a clear error of law occurs during proceedings that materially biases the outcome of the lower court case.

(2) The following conditions must be met for an interlocutory appeal to be considered:

(a) The alleged error constitutes a significant legal mistake, not merely a disagreement with the lower court's interpretation;
(b) The error substantially impacts the fairness or accuracy of the ongoing proceedings; and
(c) Delaying resolution until a final judgment would cause irreparable harm.

(3) The higher court has sole discretion to grant or deny an interlocutory appeal. If granted, proceedings in the lower court will be stayed pending the outcome of the appeal.


“
(e) The following Section shall be inserted into the Act following § 25, now renumbered § 15, with the following sections renumbered concurrently:
“
16 – Judicial Rulemaking Authority

(1) The Judiciary, consistent with the principles enshrined in the Constitution’s provision for judicial power, is authorized to create and implement Court Rules governing the procedures and administration of all courts within the Commonwealth.

(2) These rules may cover matters such as:, but are not limited to:

(a) Courtroom Proceedings
(b) Filing requirements, standing, and deadlines.
(c) Pleadings
(i) a complaint;
(ii) an answer to a complaint;
(iii) an answer to a counterclaim designated as a counterclaim;
(iv) an answer to a crossclaim;
(v) a third-party complaint;
(vi) an answer to a third-party complaint; and
(vii) if the court orders one, a reply to an answer.
(c) Any and All kinds of Court motions.
(d) Evidence admissibility standards.
(e) Objections and what constitutes one.
(e) Courtroom conduct and decorum.
(f) Case management practices.
(g) Standards for Judicial Officers.

(3) Court Rules shall have the force of law upon publication, and any challenge to a Rule’s validity must be brought before the Supreme Court.

“

(f) The following shall be appended to the Act:
“

(25) Judicial Immunity
(1) Judicial officers acting within the scope of their official judicial duties shall be granted legal immunity from civil litigation arising from actions taken in the performance of those duties.
(2) This immunity shall not apply in circumstances involving impeachment convictions duly initiated and conducted according to constitutional and statutory requirements.
(3) This immunity will not apply in circumstances involving rulings in connection with a high crime, fraud, or a fraud-related crime.
(4) Civil liability may arise in relation to rulings where immunity has been lifted under (3) of this section.


”

 

[End]

Nay - amend into JS Reform Act

 

[Silly Billy(Raz0Baz0)]

Aye - This bill appears to prevent frivolous lawsuits against the government, and I see few downsides as it stands.