on probation?

Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0

25 events

when toggle format	what		by	license	comment
Jun 12, 2023 at 21:59	comment	added	phoog		@mtraceur which is why, in the US constitution, at least, the rule is established for legislators only.
Jun 12, 2023 at 9:42	answer	added	AmiralPatate		timeline score: 3
Jun 11, 2023 at 21:57	answer	added	Simon Crase		timeline score: 1
Jun 11, 2023 at 20:24	comment	added	emory		Imprisonment, arrest, and probation are poorly defined. Most prisoners live rather drably, but there is such a thing as a luxury prison. It seems that White House is one such luxury prison. The dictator of North Korea lives in another luxury prison.
Jun 10, 2023 at 17:55	comment	added	Stef		Somewhat related: Which monarch had the longest break in their reign?
Jun 9, 2023 at 21:03	answer	added	ccprog		timeline score: 7
Jun 9, 2023 at 20:49	comment	added	mtraceur		What's interesting about this is that in the U.S., the original intent of these laws was to protect things like an elected body of representatives from an executive just arresting them to keep them from showing up for inconvenient votes and the like. Basically, it was meant to preempt/defang one of the mechanisms that a ruler (whether a king or a president) has of ratcheting their grip on power. So it's not entirely obvious that these rules were at all intended to protect a president or other executive branch agent keeping their powers during an arrest.
Jun 9, 2023 at 15:48	history	became hot network question
Jun 9, 2023 at 10:19	answer	added	CDJB♦		timeline score: 24
Jun 9, 2023 at 10:09	comment	added	pjc50		I feel that declaring the inner workings of the Parliamentary system to be "not democratic" isn't a good lens for understanding it, simply because it's not presidential
Jun 9, 2023 at 10:07	comment	added	CDJB♦		Theresa May held a GE as well, but it's sort of beside the point as that's not how the UK system works. You could add Gordon Brown and more than half of the prime ministers since 1900 to that list. I get the point you're making though, and thanks for clarifying.
Jun 9, 2023 at 10:05	answer	added	pjc50		timeline score: 13
Jun 9, 2023 at 10:03	history	edited	Nzall	CC BY-SA 4.0	edited title
Jun 9, 2023 at 10:03	comment	added	Nzall		@CDJB I'll clarify the question so that heads of government are also included. AFAIK, the UK citizens never had the opportunity to vote in an official general election whether they supported Rishi Sunak, Liz Truss or Theresa May as prime minister, and Boris Johnson had a general election AFTER he was originally elected by his party. The only people who were allowed to vote for their leader and thus prime minister were registered members of the Conservative party. As for probation and parole, they're no longer in prison, but they're still restricted, so I'd say those count as well.
Jun 9, 2023 at 9:49	comment	added	phoog		It's not clear to me whether Joe Morrissey ever did, but he did win reelection, while imprisoned, to the seat he had resigned after his conviction: Convicted Virginia state legislator wins election while in jail (Reuters). Note that this case was governed by Virginia law, and the case mentioned in the question would be governed by federal law, so there could be significant differences.
Jun 9, 2023 at 8:41	comment	added	CDJB♦		@Nzall not to get into a comments debate, but the UK PM is the head of government, not the head of state - and of course, your examples were democratically elected by their constituents as the UK has a Parliamentary system, not a Presidential. On the subject of the question, would you count cases of politicians who participated in the legislature subject to conditional release from prison on probation having served a period of their full term of imprisonment?
Jun 9, 2023 at 8:11	history	edited	Nzall	CC BY-SA 4.0	added 84 characters in body
Jun 9, 2023 at 8:09	comment	added	Wag the mainstream media dog		okay, you have a point there. For clarity, it might be useful to add your comments/examples (perhaps slightly modified) to your question - they are relevant for understanding, but risk to be deleted once the thread is too full.
Jun 9, 2023 at 8:06	comment	added	Nzall		@RogerVadim 2 examples: 1. usually members of cabinet are not democratically elected but rather appointed by the democratically elected head of state; 2. In some cases, when the head of state resigns there aren't new elections but rather the next head of state is chosen by the members of the party that is currently in power. As an example: Theresa May, Boris Johnson, Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak were all put in power by members of the Conservative party after their predecessor resigned, and NOT through a democratic election.
Jun 9, 2023 at 8:00	comment	added	Wag the mainstream media dog		if they are not democratically elected, who has the power to put them in prison? There might be cases with Kings/Emperors, but in dictatorships and similar non-democratic conditions it is unlikely. As an anecdote -many revolutionaries are reputed to have continued their work in prisons... but this was illegal work anyway.
Jun 9, 2023 at 8:00	history	edited	Nzall	CC BY-SA 4.0	added 208 characters in body
Jun 9, 2023 at 7:55	comment	added	Nzall		@RogerVadim I left that in for the inverse situation: a non-democratically elected official who was imprisoned during their term while still being allowed to perform their duties of office. Note that by "non-democratically elected" I'm referencing anyone who did not end up in power due to a vote. They could also have been appointed to that rank by a leader like most ministers or secretaries, or elected through non-democratic means like the 3 most recent UK Prime Ministers.
Jun 9, 2023 at 7:52	comment	added	Wag the mainstream media dog		Whether these people are democratically elected or landed into power through another means is not important for the question. I think this is important, because in non-democratic situation they usually have means to change the law or otherwise invalidate their prison sentence. E.g., it is very common for political prisoners to become presidents after a revolution/coup/regime overthrow. It is ultimately the separation of powers that creates a situation where a person convicted by judicial power, may still serve as a member of legislative or executive ones.
Jun 9, 2023 at 7:44	comment	added	Nzall		Note: I do not know if there are any tags that are better suited for the question than the current ones. Feel free to edit the question if you are aware of any.
Jun 9, 2023 at 7:43	history	asked	Nzall	CC BY-SA 4.0

toggle format