Origins of the Non-Delegation Doctrine
The “(a)ll legislative Powers” and “all laws necessary and proper to the execution” clauses might be read to say that no legislative power, that is no power to make general law and no discretion to spend money, whatsoever can be delegated to the executive or to any other body, for then no longer would all of the legislative powers be vested in the Congress.
Prior to reaching non-delegation, a court should ensure that the executive has not taken any more power than it was delegated.
…the main rationales, from our perspective, are to maintain the separateness of functions in the legal cycle, to minimize representation distance, and in particular to ensure that “(a)ll legislative Powers herein granted” remain with the Congress.
A statute should be construe according the principle of least authority.
The executive should derive the least amount of power over taxation, war, legal remedy, or rule-making, and the least amount of discretion over life, liberty, property, or the creation of new offices, consistent with the language and purpose of the statute.
Deference to executive branch interpretation should play no role, since this would make the executive a “judge in its own case” in terms of determining the scope of its power, even where the executive itself is not a party to the case.
Examination of the non-delegation problem sheds light on the separation of powers, on the potential for abuses of the power delegated, on the limitations of statutory and regulatory law on a national scale, and the other problems related to delegation that we have surveyed…
Looking for these factors may also alert us to situations where neither branch is competent to make rules and where delegation is the most prone to abuse.
Patterns of Integrity — Separation of Duties
1) Start with a function that (a) is too valuable to dispense with, and (b) to be performed, requires power that can be abused.
2) Divide the function into separate steps, each necessary for the function to work or for the power that enables that function to be abused. A function so divided can be called a cycle, and corresponds to a formal mathematical model called a state machine. (You do not need to know this mathematics to follow this discussion; just follow the cycle step by step).
3) Assign each step to a different person or organization. The different entities perform their particular roles in the cycle, and monitor and constrain each other, using interparty integrity constraints, to perform just their respective roles.
A legislature is a decision-making organization, usually associated with national government, that has the power to enact, amend, and repeal laws.[1] Legislatures observe and steer governing actions and usually have exclusive authority to amend the budget or budgets involved in the process. The most common names for national legislatures are “parliament” and “congress“, although these terms have more specific meanings.
The executive is the part of government that has sole authority and responsibility for the daily administration of the state. The executive branch executes or enforces the law. The division of power into separate branches of government is central to the idea of the separation of powers.
The separation of powers system is designed to distribute authority among several branches — an attempt to preserve individual liberty in response to tyrannical leadership throughout history. The executive officer is not supposed to make laws (the role of the legislature) or interpret them (the role of the judiciary). The role of the executive is to enforce the law as written by the legislature and interpreted by the judicial system.
The judiciary (also known as the judicial system or court system) is the system of courts that interprets and applies the law in the name of the state. The judiciary also provides a mechanism for the resolution of disputes. Under the doctrine of the separation of powers, the judiciary generally does not make law (that is, in a plenary fashion, which is the responsibility of the legislature) or enforce law (which is the responsibility of the executive), but rather interprets law and applies it to the facts of each case. This branch of the state is often tasked with ensuring equal justice under law. It usually consists of a court of final appeal (called the “Supreme court” or “Constitutional court“), together with lower courts.
To simplify discussions of political power and rebellion, let’s posit a system of magic Rings of Power, a la Tolkien. However, there is no master One Ring. (Tolkien surely had the correct answer for such a totalitarian power: it must be destroyed at all costs). Instead these are Rings of Discontempt that operate as follows:
(1) There are N Rings, where N is odd, say 9. Any Ring in the possession of an individual who possesses another Ring has no power (that includes the first Ring possessed — the second renders the first impotent — so that there is a strong disincentive to accumulate Rings).
(2) To operate the ring, a quorum of holders of the Rings, called the Court of Extraordinary Justices, touch their Rings together and prouounce the unique name of an individual to be punished for Contempt of Court, and pronounce a punishment.
(3) The quorum of joined Rings can administer the following magical punishments to the named person at any range:
(a) imprisonment in a magical jail for any specified number of time, requiring the aid of no human jailers
(b) instant and painless death(4) The Rings confer on their wearers complete invulnerability to any kind of violence.
There is no other magic of any sort in Juristopia.
The overall goal of Juristopia is to improve the most important functions of government (especially defense and the abatement of public nuisances) while preventing the corruption, oppression, war, genocide, and other abuses that have so often come with police powers and taxation.
Although it discards totalitarian political structure and legal procedure, our proposed form of government is based on historically proven legal mechanisms.
Much of the political structure of Juristopia is based on highly evolved common law mechanisms such as property and contract, but these are used in the same basic manner as in the common law, rather than as misleading analogies or mere labels.
An efficient market is an outcome, not a cause, of good law.
The main innovations of Juristopia are (1) to revive a kind of jurisdiction that was once a strong bulwark against totalitarianism, namely jurisdictions held as property rather than by delegation, and (2) to combine these with the recently more common bulwarks against totalitarianism, especially separation of powers and a Bill of Rights defining limits on the exercise of franchise powers against individuals.
A microkernel in a computer is a small program that contains only the most essential functions needed to manage a large number of other programs called “servers” that are conceptually independent of each other. Similarly, our governmental microkernel provides only the minimum procedural functionality needed to handle franchises, a wide variety of which in turn handle the substantive law.
…Juristopia goes much farther than most forms of government in unbundling territory from government, thereby reducing the legal transaction costs of operating in multiple territories and increasing the healthy forms of legal competition.
To simplify discussions of political power and rebellion, let’s posit a system of magic Rings of Power, a la Tolkien. However, there is no master One Ring. (Tolkien surely had the correct answer for such a totalitarian power: it must be destroyed at all costs). Instead these are Rings of Discontempt that operate as follows:
(1) There are N Rings, where N is odd, say 9. Any Ring in the possession of an individual who possesses another Ring has no power (that includes the first Ring possessed — the second renders the first impotent — so that there is a strong disincentive to accumulate Rings).
(2) To operate the ring, a quorum of holders of the Rings, called the Court of Extraordinary Justices, touch their Rings together and prouounce the unique name of an individual to be punished for Contempt of Court, and pronounce a punishment.
(3) The quorum of joined Rings can administer the following magical punishments to the named person at any range:
(a) imprisonment in a magical jail for any specified number of time, requiring the aid of no human jailers
(b) instant and painless death(4) The Rings confer on their wearers complete invulnerability to any kind of violence.
There is no other magic of any sort in Juristopia.
Once the tokens have been distributed to donors, the organization as a whole belongs to Nxt community token holders, and token holders in the broader crypto community. Not only is NxtPoker DAO owned by the community of token holders, they actually influence and direct improvements to NxtPoker initiatives by supporting ideas and plans that match the nxtpoker bylaws or rules. Board members execute the outcomes of votes on issues or initiatives voted on by token holders, which had previously been distilled down to a few options, through a discussion process with the community or between all board members. Board members also serve the community by reviewing performance, token payouts, compensations to workers and devs, discussions and revolving issues, and other responsibilities in the rules (bylaws).
Decentralized Autonomous Organization
The “Achilles’ heel” of the Centralized Poker Industry
In relation to poker, the players have a corresponding solution, since poker sites effectively operate on the same type of Keynesian/central banking model:
Players simply need to collectively demand that their rakeback points be paid out as a digital currency (or assets), so that it may be freely traded on a digital asset exchange.
Enacting this simple change will set in place the foundation and infrastructure for decentralized poker through:
Creating Assets as Single Unique Identifiers
Establishing a Poker Forum CoinUltimately leading to Ideal Poker
Conclusion
There may be then a way in which to setup up the economy of poker in a “semi” decentralized form that facilitates the security needs of the entire system. In this way the problem of “mental poker” becomes not one of n players trying to shuffle/deal a deck of cards in a decentralized fashion, but rather the re-arrangement of the overall systems on which the game is played. By arranging the major players of this system (players community, sites, financial, governments) in an ideal perspective, we are able to construct a solution that facilitates the most optimal sustainability for the economy of the game: An environment where sites evolve the most secure and profitable game possible.
thewealthofchips 