Judicial Acts". Included under that title are documents like the "Criminal Procedure Act (November 2019)" which stipulates a framework for petitioning the court and illustrates a timeline for due process. Everyone should be aware of our "Criminal Code Act (September 2018)" and its latest July 2020 permutation that enumerates all the possible ways one can break the law as a shareholder. In fact, Demonos anticipates that responses to this thread may base arguments on these documents or the empowering Article V of the 12th Mandate
McChimp v. Vedan case. Demonos will not argue here if the rendered judgement by a resigned Justice was legal because the precedent does not exist to base an argument on. Nor is it the purpose of this amicus to overturn that decision. Rather, the point being sought here is that a judgement was made outside of constitutional requirements for three sitting Justices.[/size]
You can't go about creating law at your own whim. You are defaming a citizen of Lazarus with your drafts and threats. Either make formal charges or not at all.
You can't go about creating law at your own whim. You are defaming a citizen of Lazarus with your drafts and threats. Either make formal charges or not at all.
You can't go about creating law at your own whim. You are defaming a citizen of Lazarus with your drafts and threats. Either make formal charges or not at all.
You can't go about creating law at your own whim. You are defaming a citizen of Lazarus with your drafts and threats. Either make formal charges or not at all.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
