In re Impeachment of Wolf 2020 SDSC 8
In re Impeachment of Wolf 2020 SDSC 8
| Date of judgment | 13th April 2020 |
|---|---|
| Justices | Acting Chief Justice LordDeadlyOwl Acting Justice Ivy Cactus Acting Justice Comstock |
| Held | Impeachment of Wolf was unconstitutional as it violated the right to a fair hearing |
| Ruling | 3-0 |
| Applicable precedent |
MAJORITY OPINION by Acting Chief Justice LordDeadlyOwl
(with Acting Justices Ivy Cactus and Comstock agreeing)
[1]. The first thing the Supreme court would like to say is that, even though the part of the constitution that was referred to in the review has been removed during the court's "thinking period" the supreme court allows the review to continue. This is due to two things. Firstly, the review being on an act of senate taken before the laws was changed, and is thus outside the scope of this change. Secondly, if proven unconstitutional would invalidate the referendum impeaching Mr. Wolf from his position as Judge.
[2]. The second thing the Supreme Court would like to state is that the petitioner asked to "use the wall texts" in his petition. This, under the court's assessment, meant all wall texts produced regarding judicial reviews at the day of the request, and was following this pasted into the review, on the petitioner's request.
[3]. Several of the petitioner's arguments were irrelevant to the review and will not be deliberated on by the Supreme Court, due to it being a waste of the courts time. The parts the court took into their deliberation is the first two paragraphs that say: "I summon the elemental powers of earth, wind, fire, love, and article 1 section 5 of the Constitution which states: The Senate may impeach any government official for abuse of power, treason, or other high crimes and misdemeanors by a 2/3 majority vote. As I have not been found guilty by any court for any of the above charges, the impeachment has gone forward unlawfully. Further, it denies my right to a fair hearing under article 26, and it is outside the jurisdiction of the Senate to find me guilty of any crimes or misdemeanours to begin with. If the Senate wish to pursue impeachment if I am later found guilty of any charges, that is their prerogative. However, at this time they have acted outside the scope of their powers. They do not love. They do not care about baby animals. They only wish to impeach. It is all they know and all they wish to know.”
[4]. The court also ignores the respondent's second part named: "Argument to the Senate’s Rights to Make and Pass Legislation
