<aside> <img src="/icons/info-alternate_gray.svg" alt="/icons/info-alternate_gray.svg" width="40px" />

Syllabus

NOTE: Where it is feasible, a Syllabus will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, by the Office of Legislative Support (in collaboration with the Supreme Court) after the case is concluded. The Syllabus constitutes no part of the Opinion or Order of the Court but has been prepared for the convenience of the reader.

JOHN PRESTON v. REPUBLIC OF KRAMERIA

Argued on First Impression June 2026 Decided on First Impression June 16, 2026

On en banc review from the single-justice Panel of First Impression.

Re-Argued June 2026 Decided June 22, 2026

AFFIRMED THE PANEL OF FIRST IMPRESSION Affirmed as modified.

The question placed before the single-justice Panel of First Impression was whether Title 2, Section 1, Subsection 3 of the Republic Electoral Act of March, 2026 (Title 6, Chapter 1, Part 101, § 101.2, Sub-§ B of the Kramerian Code) which provides “Directors of the KEB shall be subject to impeachment using the same method as any other government official” is unconstitutional, whereas the Constitution only establishes two two types of impeachment, one for the President and one for Justices of the Supreme Court, (Article 27 of the Constitution) neither of which are applicable for “any other government official”. The Republic declined to contest. An intervenor, Foog, submitted an amicus curiae brief in support of the Respondent.

The Panel of First Impression ruled in favour of the Plaintiff, and ordered that the case be sent for en banc review because they deemed the statute at hand structurally repugnant to the Constitution. The Court reheard the case en banc and came to a similar conclusion as the Panel of First Impression.

SCOTROK Single-Justice Panel of First Impression decisions carry binding precedent unless overturned by SCOTROK en banc.

Held: (No. 1-4 by the Panel of First Impression, No. 5 by SCOTROK as a whole)

  1. Even if the provisions of a law have not been made tangible through enforcement, a law must nonetheless be subject to judicial review.
  2. An Impeachment is the Congressional criminal prosecution of a government official.
  3. While Congress may have the right to remove KEB Directors, they cannot prosecute Directors. And prosecution is the defining element of Impeachment.
  4. Congress cannot grant itself the authority to prosecute more Kramerians than the Constitution enumerates, even if those Kramerians possess statutory government positions created by Congress, so they must prescribe a removal process other than Impeachment.
  5. It is clear that Congress has the power to create a Kramerian Election Bureau (KEB). However, in describing how a KEB Director is to be removed from office, REA was too vague. There is no single method for impeaching government officials.  </aside>

Initial Trial

En Banc Review