Syllabus

Majority Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Ben

1. Introduction

On 16 June 2026, the court of first impression issued its decision in Preston V. The Republic of Krameria [CC-CV-13] (Preston v. Krameria hereafter). Justice Roltech Freland found that Title II, Section 1, Clause 3 of the Republic Electoral Act of March, 2026 (REA hereafter) was structurally repugnant to the Constitution, and referred this matter to be heard en banc per Article 38 of the Constitution.

The matter before the Supreme Court is not an appeal of the decision per se, but rather to affirm or reject the constitutionality of REA II§1.3.

1. Laws and definitions

The relevant clause of REA is copied here for reference:

“Directors of the KEB shall be subject to impeachment using the same method as any other government official.”

Article 27 of the Constitution requires a two-thirds supermajority vote from Congress to “impeach” the President and Supreme Court Justices, who must then be “convicted” by the Supreme Court (or former justices).

Amendment II, Article 1 of the Constitution provides that Congress may “expel” a member by a two-thirds supermajority vote.

Article 27 of the Constitution permits Congress to regulate elections and make necessary and proper laws to do so.

1. Decision

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.

Thus, REA II§1.3 is inoperative until a method for impeaching officials generally is defined, or otherwise amended.

It is so ordered,