In the afternoon hours of the 31st of August, previous Attorney General Derogatoryyy submitted his resignation from his office and left peacefully1. Shortly after his resignation, Governor Orangebear22 posted that he would recess appoint sadoimpacto as the 9th Attorney General of the State of Mayflower2. Sadoimpacto is an individual who is marked with controversy as a very litigious man by people affected by his lawsuits, but he has recently climbed the ranks of the Mayflower Department of Justice.
After his appointment, the Attorney General issued Directive No. 2025-83125-03, which revoked the law enforcement authority of 10 different individuals3. They can no longer exercise law enforcement duties as prescribed by the Mayflower State Code, and puts their careers in jeopardy in the agencies the individuals work in.
When Attorney General sadoimpacto was asked for comments on the matter, he had said the following;
The decision to revoke the law enforcement authorities of those individuals was made after a careful review of their conduct and responsibilities. The Department of Justice has an obligation to ensure that its officers act within the bounds of law, policy, and public trust. Where individuals demonstrate behavior inconsistent with these standards, it becomes necessary to withdraw delegated authorities in order to preserve the integrity of the Department and maintain public confidence in its operations.
This action was not taken lightly. It reflects the Department’s ongoing commitment to accountability and to ensuring that only those who can exercise law enforcement powers responsibly are entrusted with them.— sadoimpacto, Attorney General
For a balanced approach on the matter we asked previous Chief Judge of the Superior Court of Ridgeway Koala4life KC for comment. When asked for his opinion, he had this to share;
It is a well-established principle in administrative law that an administrative decision cannot stand if it contravenes the principles of procedural fairness, is based on an error of law or is clearly unreasonable. It would appear that the memorandum issued by the AG is not supported with reasons for issuing the administrative decision, making it prima facie clearly unreasonable. On those grounds alone, the subject parties would likely succeed on judicial review to overturn the AG’s order.
— Koala4life, former Ridgeway Chief Judge
Additionally, if the subject parties are hearing this order for the first time, without having been given an opportunity to respond and give reasons for why the order should not be issued prior to the order taking effect, the order may also contravene the principles of procedural fairness-# Written by Lusolabs, 09/01/2002
THIS WEEK'S TOP STORIES