Comment on Fact-checking for the "No" referendum pamphlet was not compulsory
Ilandar@aussie.zone 1 year agoWhether 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 1 year 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 1 year ago
The Guardian never claimed otherwise.