To: Citizens of United Knights of Dalewood
From: Mr. Nesin, Teacher
Date: February 21, 2024
Re: Constitutional Interpretation 2024-1 (Meaning of “the Class” in Article 3, Section 3)
Article 3, Section 5 of the United Knights of Dalewood (“U.K.D”) Constitution states that the “Teacher is given limited authority by the class to interpret and enforce the provisions of this Constitution … .” I am using that limited authority now. For the reasons stated in this opinion, I find that the language “A majority of voters in the class” in Article 3, Section 3 means a majority of voters in the U.K.D.
I. Background
On February 14 and 15, 2024, citizens of the U.K.D. voted on the question of whether the “Knight/Owl/Sword” seal should be adopted as the official seal of the U.K.D. The Knight/Owl/Sword seal is shown below:
The vote in Mid-Knight was 4-12. But the vote in Lawcedonia was 19-3. The Constitution is ambiguous about the vote necessary to pass a national law. This prompted a question of constitutional interpretation. If laws are passed by a majority of total voters, then the law passed by a total vote of 23-15. But if laws must be passed by a majority of voters in each state, then the law failed to pass because it did not achieve a majority in Mid-Knight.
II. Constitutional analysis
“Each Class,” “every Law Class,” and “all Students in the United Knights of Dalewood” are all clear
Article 3 Section 3 states that “A majority of voters in the Class is required to enact, amend, and repeal laws.” The ambiguity in this provision with respect to national laws stems from the use of the word “the,” because there are multiple classes that make up the nation.
The Founders of the Constitution contemplated the possibility that there would be multiple classes in the U.K.D. When the Constitution clearly refers to a single class within the U.K.D., it uses the words “each Class.” See U.K.D. Const. Art. 3, Sec. 1. Similarly, ratifying the Constitution required “a majority (50%) of the Students in every Law Class.” See U.K.D. Const. Art. 4 (emphasis added). But when the Constitution refers to Students in all classes, it uses the words “all Students in the United Knights of Dalewood.” See U.K.D. Const. Art. 4.
The use of “the Class” in Article 3, Section 3, at least with respect to national laws, is therefore confusing. It could potentially refer to a majority of each Class or a majority of all Students in the U.K.D.
The Constitution does not seem to contemplate the existence of national laws
The term “the Class” is used numerous times in the U.K.D. Constitution. In most of those instances it clearly refers to a specific Class within the U.K.D. See U.K.D. Const. Art. 1, Secs. 1-5; Art. 3, Sec. 1. These instances can only be read as references to a single class. For example, “The Teacher may call on Students without raised hands when given permission by the Class” can only refer to one class because the Teacher can only call on Students one Class at a time. See U.K.D. Const. Art. 1, Sec. 1.
The plain text of the Constitution indicates that the Founders never even contemplated the existence of national laws. The most obvious evidence is the provision stating that “Each Student in the Class has a vote on any proposed enactment, amendment, or repeal of a Class law.” See U.K.D. Const. Art. 3, Sec. 2 (emphasis added). There are no similar references to national laws. Another textual clue is found in the repeated references to “the Constitution or a Class law”, but not national laws, when discussing Teacher Censure. See U.K.D. Const. Art. 3, Sec. 6a-c.
The failure of the Founders to contemplate national laws was also confirmed by one of the principle drafters of the Constitution. On February 16, 2024, Lunar Juergens visited Mid-Knight to shed light on this issue of Constitutional interpretation. Juergens confirmed that, to the best of their recollection, the Founders did not envision that there would be national laws, only Class laws.
The most sensible way to read “voters in the Class”, with respect to national laws, is “voters in the U.K.D.”
It is the responsibility of the Teacher to interpret Article 3, Section 3. See U.K.D. Const. Art. 3, Sec. 5. I believe that I should be guided by how the Founders would likely have decided the question, if they had considered it.
There are several provisions of the Constitution that shed light on how the Founders might have wanted national laws to be voted upon. It uses a direct democracy to pass Class laws, with a simple majority of the Class required for passage. See U.K.D. Const. Art. 3, Sec. 3. It requires a supermajority of all voters in the nation to make Constitutional amendments. See U.K.D. Const. Art. 4. But it requires a majority in each class to ratify the Constitution.
Based on an analysis of these provisions, I conclude that the authors of the Constitution would have allowed for national laws to be enacted, amended, and repealed by a majority of voters in the U.K.D., even if the voters in one Class disagreed. This is most consistent with the manner in which both Class laws and Constitutional amendments are determined. The only exception is the ratification provision, but ratification is a unique procedure designed to assure that no Class would be forced into the U.K.D. against its will.
This decision should not be retroactive to previous semesters
The only remaining question is whether the decision in this opinion extends backwards to previous semesters. The practical impact of that decision will determine whether the bear is the official animal of the U.K.D.
On September 13, 2023, Mid-Knight voted in favor of making the bear the official animal of the U.K.D. The vote was 20-5. On September 14, 2023, Lawcedonia failed to get a majority to vote for the bear as the official animal of the U.K.D. The vote was 5-18. At the time, I determined that the vote had failed and that the bear should not be the national animal. However, under the principles in this opinion, the bear would have been elected by a vote of 25-23.
However, I determine that Constitutional interpretations by the Teacher cannot be reconsidered from previous semesters. The Teacher has limited authority to make such interpretations. See U.K.D. Const. Art. 3, Sec. 5. Students can censure the Teacher for an improper interpretation and seek a remedy during the semester in which that interpretation is made. See U.K.D. Const. Art. 3, Sec. 6b. But allowing every semester of Students to revisit earlier Constitutional interpretations would open up the Teacher to repeated censures for every decision made. This could hobble the government and make it dysfunctional. Had the Students in Fall 2023 challenged the Teacher’s interpretation in a timely fashion, the result might have been different. But it is too late to correct the mistake now.
III. Conclusion
For the reasons stated above, the “Knight/Owl/Sword” is now recognized as the official seal of the U.K.D. In addition, the bear is not recognized as the official animal of the U.K.D.