To Whom It May Concern:
From my understanding of the law it is the legislation of a bill, and not the bill itself, that gives power or credence to it. Without the written portion of the bill, the bill on its own is simply an empty shell of a law. The legislation is what enacts or reenacts a bill. It is what makes it a law.
Public Act (P.A.) 90-592 & p.a. 90-593 reenacted the addition of this section by P.A. 89-404 which had been held by various Illinois appellate courts to be in violation of the single subject requirement of subsection(d) of Section 8 of Article IV of the Illinois Constitution. These two public acts (90-592 & 90-593) differ; however, in the date provided regarding when the Commission (Truth-in-Sentencing Commission) shall present a full report & a draft of appropriate Truth-in-Sentencing (truth) legislation to the Governor & General Assembly; both whom are the most integral entities in passing & signing a bill into law. P.A. 90-593 requires the report & draft of legislation by Sept. 30, 1998. P.A. 90-592 requires the report & draft of legislation by March 1, 1999.
These two public acts (90-592 & 90-593) are the laws that call for me to do 100% of my time. They are only a portion of the entire guidelines. Ever so often these guidelines, these public acts that make up the body of truth laws are amended corrected so as to not have to rewrite the entire truth laws. P.A. 89-404 was found in violation of the Illinois Constitution in 1997. This caused the entire truth law to be found unconstitutional. So they had to amend or correct P.A. 89-404. They did so by passing P.A. 90-592 and P.A. 90-593 on May 5, 1998. I was arrested on my case on June 23, 1998; only four days after the two public acts took effect. Therefore, I have to do 100% of my time.
The definition of the word legislati as written by Blacks Law Dictionary states as follows: (1) The process of making or enacting a positive law in written form, according to some type of formal procedure, by a branch of government constituted to perform this process, (2) The laws so enacted, (3) The whole body of enacted laws.
In my case, P.A. 90-592 & P.A. 90-593 were passed by the General Assembly on May 5, 1998, and went into effect June 19, 1998 with the legislation for these two acts to be written on a later date by the truth Commission. Therefore, by definition of the word legislation, these two acts were passed having no positive law written in them. Public Acts 90-592 & 90-593 were passed to amend or correct a portion of the truth law that was found unconstitutional. Without them, P.A. 89-404, the unconstitutional portion of the truth law, would have been the only active law on the books because there was no written law to make these two public acts in virtue constitutionally oppose the public act they were passed to amend or correct.
According to Blacks Law Dictionary, the word amend means: (1) To make right; to correct or rectify, (2) To change the wording of; to alter formally by adding or deleting a provision or by modifying the wording.
One could argue that the General Assembly amended the law by deleting the portion of 89-404 that was deemed unconstitutional; therefore, reenacting the truth laws. But to do this would mean that there would be no need for the amendment of P.A. 89-404 by public acts 90-592 & 90-593, which by their own admission, officially reenacted the truth laws.
Article IV s8 of the Illinois Constitution speaks specifically on the passage of bills. It states, "A bill shall be read by title on three different days in each house. A bill & each amendment thereto shall be reproduced & placed on the desk of each member before final passage. A bill expressly amending a law shall set forth completely the sections amended."
These verifiable truths I have intimated heretofore poses for me a series of questions:
1. How does the General Assembly pass & then have the Governor sign off on a bill that has no legislation? A bill that has yet to be written.
2. If the legislation of a bill is what actually constitutes a bill having the ability to become a law, does this mean that P.A. 90-592 & 90-593 should not have been officially enacted until the legislation for them were duly drafted?
3. Does this not also call into question whether P.A. 90-592 & P.A. 90-593 are both in violation of Article IV s8 of the Illinois Constitution in that they did not set forth complete the public act they were supposed to amend?
4. How could they, neither of them had been written at the time they were passed?
In closing, I am of the conviction that P.A. 90-592 & P.A. 90-593 are in direct violation of Article IV Section 8 of the Illinois Constitution in that, because of their absence of any form of written legislation, they did not set forth completely the public act they were purported to amend at the time they were passed by the General Assembly. In effect, I believe these two public acts should be considered void abnitio & and are dangerously close to being enacted ex post facto laws.
My wish is to possibly receive any advice from you concerning the plausibility of my argument. And, if you are at all familiar with the Truth-In-Sentencing laws, bestow upon me the guidance needed for which direction I should go in hence-forth.
Sincerely,
Kwayera K. Jackson - #K91891
P.O. Box 1000
Menard, IL 62259
"Remember Those in Prison as if You Were Their Fellow Prisoners, & Those Mistreated as if You Yourselves Were Suffering"
From my understanding of the law it is the legislation of a bill, and not the bill itself, that gives power or credence to it. Without the written portion of the bill, the bill on its own is simply an empty shell of a law. The legislation is what enacts or reenacts a bill. It is what makes it a law.
Public Act (P.A.) 90-592 & p.a. 90-593 reenacted the addition of this section by P.A. 89-404 which had been held by various Illinois appellate courts to be in violation of the single subject requirement of subsection(d) of Section 8 of Article IV of the Illinois Constitution. These two public acts (90-592 & 90-593) differ; however, in the date provided regarding when the Commission (Truth-in-Sentencing Commission) shall present a full report & a draft of appropriate Truth-in-Sentencing (truth) legislation to the Governor & General Assembly; both whom are the most integral entities in passing & signing a bill into law. P.A. 90-593 requires the report & draft of legislation by Sept. 30, 1998. P.A. 90-592 requires the report & draft of legislation by March 1, 1999.
These two public acts (90-592 & 90-593) are the laws that call for me to do 100% of my time. They are only a portion of the entire guidelines. Ever so often these guidelines, these public acts that make up the body of truth laws are amended corrected so as to not have to rewrite the entire truth laws. P.A. 89-404 was found in violation of the Illinois Constitution in 1997. This caused the entire truth law to be found unconstitutional. So they had to amend or correct P.A. 89-404. They did so by passing P.A. 90-592 and P.A. 90-593 on May 5, 1998. I was arrested on my case on June 23, 1998; only four days after the two public acts took effect. Therefore, I have to do 100% of my time.
The definition of the word legislati as written by Blacks Law Dictionary states as follows: (1) The process of making or enacting a positive law in written form, according to some type of formal procedure, by a branch of government constituted to perform this process, (2) The laws so enacted, (3) The whole body of enacted laws.
In my case, P.A. 90-592 & P.A. 90-593 were passed by the General Assembly on May 5, 1998, and went into effect June 19, 1998 with the legislation for these two acts to be written on a later date by the truth Commission. Therefore, by definition of the word legislation, these two acts were passed having no positive law written in them. Public Acts 90-592 & 90-593 were passed to amend or correct a portion of the truth law that was found unconstitutional. Without them, P.A. 89-404, the unconstitutional portion of the truth law, would have been the only active law on the books because there was no written law to make these two public acts in virtue constitutionally oppose the public act they were passed to amend or correct.
According to Blacks Law Dictionary, the word amend means: (1) To make right; to correct or rectify, (2) To change the wording of; to alter formally by adding or deleting a provision or by modifying the wording.
One could argue that the General Assembly amended the law by deleting the portion of 89-404 that was deemed unconstitutional; therefore, reenacting the truth laws. But to do this would mean that there would be no need for the amendment of P.A. 89-404 by public acts 90-592 & 90-593, which by their own admission, officially reenacted the truth laws.
Article IV s8 of the Illinois Constitution speaks specifically on the passage of bills. It states, "A bill shall be read by title on three different days in each house. A bill & each amendment thereto shall be reproduced & placed on the desk of each member before final passage. A bill expressly amending a law shall set forth completely the sections amended."
These verifiable truths I have intimated heretofore poses for me a series of questions:
1. How does the General Assembly pass & then have the Governor sign off on a bill that has no legislation? A bill that has yet to be written.
2. If the legislation of a bill is what actually constitutes a bill having the ability to become a law, does this mean that P.A. 90-592 & 90-593 should not have been officially enacted until the legislation for them were duly drafted?
3. Does this not also call into question whether P.A. 90-592 & P.A. 90-593 are both in violation of Article IV s8 of the Illinois Constitution in that they did not set forth complete the public act they were supposed to amend?
4. How could they, neither of them had been written at the time they were passed?
In closing, I am of the conviction that P.A. 90-592 & P.A. 90-593 are in direct violation of Article IV Section 8 of the Illinois Constitution in that, because of their absence of any form of written legislation, they did not set forth completely the public act they were purported to amend at the time they were passed by the General Assembly. In effect, I believe these two public acts should be considered void abnitio & and are dangerously close to being enacted ex post facto laws.
My wish is to possibly receive any advice from you concerning the plausibility of my argument. And, if you are at all familiar with the Truth-In-Sentencing laws, bestow upon me the guidance needed for which direction I should go in hence-forth.
Sincerely,
Kwayera K. Jackson - #K91891
P.O. Box 1000
Menard, IL 62259
"Remember Those in Prison as if You Were Their Fellow Prisoners, & Those Mistreated as if You Yourselves Were Suffering"