Comment on Fact-checking for the "No" referendum pamphlet was not compulsory
w2qw@aussie.zone 11 months agoIs the Voice not (or will be) constitutional legislation? I do agree that it largely hands over the powers to the parliament but there is a caveat that they can rule on what it means for them to be able to make representations to parliament.
Ilandar@aussie.zone 11 months ago
Whether the Voice is, or is not, constitutional legislation was never commented on by me or the person I replied to. It wasn’t raised in The Guardian article either, so I’m not sure why you’re asking me this question.
w2qw@aussie.zone 11 months ago
Sorry I was referring to this bit “The referendum amendment clearly says parliament will have the power to make laws with “respect to matters relating to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, including its composition, functions, powers and procedures””. It would be up to the high court to interpret what that means. I think that’s what OP was referring to when saying that High Court interprets constitutional legislation.
Ilandar@aussie.zone 11 months ago
The Guardian never claimed otherwise.