You are correct.  The High Court will have zero regard for the consequences of how they rule on the Law.

They will try to make sense of Section 44 and I reckon that is simple....the Constitution requires that a MP have ONE loyalty....that is, to Australia...and not (even without knowing at a particular time.......that is far too easy to claim.......) have either citizenship or entitlement to citizenship of a foreign power.

I say they must have an honest and reasonable belief that their only entitlement/citizenship was to Australia.

I say that, given Joyce knew his Old Man was a Kiwi, therefore he had a positive obligation to make full enquiry about his position and then deal with it by renunciation.

Putting head in sand/ignoring/blind eye is not good enough.

Aussie wrote on Aug 20^th, 2017 at 5:36pm:



Aussie,
all I'm saying is that I now agree with your summation -
Joyce is going to get his arse kicked out.

It's crazy & it means that our High Court is inferior to the American Supreme Court.
The Yanks can change bad laws there - we can't here.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20^th, 2017 at 5:41pm:



So all you have are Ad Hominem attacks?

Try & do better Longy.

It is Sunday - your day of worship & goodwill to all men.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20^th, 2017 at 5:53pm:



More Ad Hominem attacks.

The Yanky Supreme Court can change stupid laws -
our High Court can't.
Wait until Shorty becomes PM over this & you'll change your tune.

Bobby. wrote on Aug 20^th, 2017 at 6:11pm:


I know you think you are making some kind of powerful argument, but you are not in fact making a point at all. Do you even realise that Roe v Wade was a CONSTITUTIONAL issue and not a legislative one? Do you even know the difference?

The unique position of the Supreme Court stems, in large part, from the deep commitment of the American people to the Rule of Law and to constitutional government. The United States has demonstrated an unprecedented determination to preserve and protect its written Constitution, thereby providing the American "experiment in democracy" with the oldest written Constitution still in force.

The Constitution of the United States is a carefully balanced document. It is designed to provide for a national government sufficiently strong and flexible to meet the needs of the republic, yet sufficiently limited and just to protect the guaranteed rights of citizens; it permits a balance between society’s need for order and the individual’s right to freedom. To assure these ends, the Framers of the Constitution created three independent and coequal branches of government. That this Constitution has provided continuous democratic government through the periodic stresses of more than two centuries illustrates the genius of the American system of government.

The complex role of the Supreme Court in this system derives from its authority to invalidate legislation or executive actions which, in the Court’s considered judgment, conflict with the Constitution. This power of "judicial review" has given the Court a crucial responsibility in assuring individual rights, as well as in maintaining a "living Constitution" whose broad provisions are continually applied to complicated new situations.