Recently, Belschaft has submitted a Legal Question requesting that the Courts determine the legality of the Chair's actions in not bringing legislation, that has been duly motioned and seconded, to vote.

I'm inclined to dismiss the case, because according to law, while not explicitly defined, Article 4, Section 3.5 of the Charter states that

"The Court Justices shall have the authority to examine laws and make recommendations to the Assembly, however they may not issue an arbitrary judgement or opinion on laws without a specific legal question being filed."

which implies that Legal Questions are meant to examine and clarify laws only, hence it is not the place of the Courts to determine the legality of an official's actions.



However, while the Court, in the form of its predecessor, the Supreme Court, and also in its current form, has ruled on what officials cannot do, never has the Court, in any of its iterations, explicitly ruled on whether or not an official's actions is in contravention with the law. Nor has the Court been requested to explicitly determine the legal ramifications of an official's actions, given that this legislation was not brought to vote by the Assembly, which would have otherwise made the abovementioned possible.

Also, it is worth noting that the Chair has since brought the relevant pieces of legislation to vote, specifically here and here.

Thoughts?