Questions about example sentences with, and the definition and usage of "Constitutional"

A: "The court is deciding whether the new law is constitutional"

"The states are deliberating creating a new constitutional amendment"

constitutional = ある国の憲法のもとで禁止されていないさま。また、ある国の憲法に関係するさま

A: These are tough questions. Constitutional can mean pertaining to the US Constitution. It can also mean something regarding one's health. Examples:

Freedom of religion is a constitutional right.
He has a very hearty constitution.

A: This is how your pronounce "constitutional" in English.

A: The text you’ve provided is quite clear, but there are some areas where slight adjustments could improve the flow and clarity for a UK English audience. Here’s a refined version:

---

The terms of Constitutional Court President Lee Jong-seok and Justices Lee Young-jin and Kim Ki-young will end on 17 October. The National Assembly must nominate their successors, but the process has stalled due to a standoff between the ruling and opposition parties.

The Constitutional Court requires the attendance of at least seven out of nine justices to proceed with hearings. Without timely nominations, the court will be paralysed in a week.

Constitutional Court Justice Moon Hyung-bae has asked for the National Assembly’s position on the issue while finalising preparations for the impeachment trial of Korea Communications Commission (KCC) Chairperson Lee Jin-sook on 8 October.

* The Democratic Party impeached Lee Jin-sook, who had been appointed to reform the public broadcaster MBC, which had been controlled by the Democratic Trade Unionists—regarded as one of the three biggest problems in the country—just three days after her appointment.

* As she is currently impeached, it is impossible to change the executive or management team of MBC. I hope that the Constitutional Court makes a quick decision this week.

The risk of the court's paralysis stems from the Democratic Party’s insistence on nominating two of the three new justices for the National Assembly’s portion.

Under current law, the president appoints three justices, while the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court nominates another three. The National Assembly nominates the remaining three, although the process for this has not been clearly outlined.

Historically, when seats were similarly distributed, the ruling and opposition parties each nominated one justice, and the third was selected by mutual agreement. However, the Democratic Party is now insisting on nominating two.

Under such circumstances, the Democratic Party could impeach any minister they disapprove of, effectively suspending them from office through impeachment votes.

Once an impeachment motion is passed, the official is suspended from their duties, meaning the Democratic Party holds de facto dismissal power over public officials. For instance, the defence of KCC Chairperson Lee Jin-sook and Chief Prosecutor Sohn Jun-sung, both currently suspended due to impeachment motions initiated by the Democratic Party, will inevitably be delayed.

If an impeachment motion were brought against the President of South Korea and proceeded without a functioning court, it could lead to a complete constitutional breakdown.

The prospect of a paralysed Constitutional Court is now a real threat. With the terms of three justices expiring within a week, there is no time left to agree on an election process involving hearings and parliamentary consent unless both parties act immediately.

An unprecedented vacuum in the Constitutional Court is unavoidable unless a compromise is reached between the ruling and opposition parties. No matter how dysfunctional the political landscape may be, allowing a core constitutional institution to stop functioning is inconceivable.

If this deadlock continues, conspiracy theories suggesting that “the opposition seeks to neutralise the Constitutional Court to carry out the impeachment process unilaterally” could gain traction.

To dispel suspicions that the main opposition party is intentionally paralysing the Constitutional Court for political gain, the Democratic Party must actively engage in the process of selecting new justices.

If agreement on the distribution of seats remains elusive, the ruling and opposition parties could each elect one justice to restore the Constitutional Court’s functionality.

A: × The Constitutional Court requires the attendance of at least seven out of nine justices to proceed with hearings.
✓ The Constitutional Court requires at least seven out of nine justices to proceed with hearings.

× The court will be paralyzed in a week if the National Assembly does not elect new justices in time.
✓ If the National Assembly does not elect new justices in time, the court will be paralyzed within a week.

× Constitutional Court Justice Moon Hyung-bae has asked the National Assembly’s stance on this issue while wrapping up preparations for the impeachment trial of Korea Communications Commission (KCC) Chairperson Lee Jin-sook on Oct. 8.
✓ Constitutional Court Justice Moon Hyung-bae has asked the National Assembly for its stance on this issue while wrapping up preparations for the impeachment trial of Korea Communications Commission (KCC) Chairperson Lee Jin-sook on Oct. 8.

× * The Democratic Party impeached Lee Jin-sook, who was appointed to normalize the public broadcaster MBC, which was controlled by the Democratic Trade Unionists, the country's three biggest evils, just three days after her appointment.
✓ The Democratic Party impeached Lee Jin-sook, who was appointed to normalize the public broadcaster MBC, which had been controlled by the Democratic Trade Unionists — considered one of the country’s three biggest evils — just three days after her appointment.

× * As she is currently impeached, it is not possible to change the executive/management team of MBC.
✓ Since she is currently under impeachment, it is not possible to change the executive/management team at MBC.

× I hope that the Constitutional Court will make a quick decision this week.
✓ I hope the Constitutional Court will make a swift decision this week.

× The court’s paralysis risk stems from the Democratic Party’s insistence on nominating two of the three new justices for the National Assembly’s portion.
✓ The risk of court paralysis stems from the Democratic Party’s insistence on nominating two of the three new justices for the National Assembly’s portion.

× The National Assembly nominates the remaining three, though no specific method for this nomination process has been stipulated.
✓ The National Assembly nominates the remaining three, although no specific method for this nomination process has been outlined.

× In the past, when there was a similar distribution of seats, the ruling and opposition parties each nominated one justice, and the third justice was selected by mutual agreement.
✓ In the past, when party representation was similarly divided, the ruling and opposition parties each nominated one justice, and the third justice was selected by mutual agreement.

× But the Democratic Party is insisting on nominating two this time.
✓ However, this time, the Democratic Party insists on nominating two.

× Under such circumstances, the Democratic Party could impeach any minister they disapprove of, effectively suspending them from office through impeachment votes.
✓ In this scenario, the Democratic Party could potentially impeach any minister they disapprove of, effectively suspending them from office through impeachment votes.

× Once an impeachment motion is passed, the official is suspended from their duties, meaning the Democratic Party holds de facto dismissal power over public officials.
✓ Once an impeachment motion is passed, the official is suspended from duty, which means the Democratic Party wields de facto dismissal power over public officials.

× For instance, the defense of KCC Chairperson Lee Jin-sook and Chief Prosecutor Sohn Jun-sung, who are currently suspended from their duties due to impeachment motions initiated by the Democratic Party, will inevitably be delayed.
✓ For instance, the defense of KCC Chairperson Lee Jin-sook and Chief Prosecutor Sohn Jun-sung, both currently suspended from their duties due to impeachment motions initiated by the Democratic Party, will inevitably face delays.

× If an impeachment motion for the President of South Korea were to be proposed and proceed without a functioning court, it could lead to a complete constitutional breakdown.
✓ If an impeachment motion for the President of South Korea were proposed and moved forward without a functioning court, it could lead to a complete constitutional breakdown.

× The prospect of a Constitutional Court paralysis is now looming as a real threat.
✓ The looming threat of a paralyzed Constitutional Court is now becoming a real concern.

× With the three justices’ terms expiring within a week, it’s too late to agree on an election process involving hearings and parliamentary consent unless both parties take immediate action.
✓ With the terms of three justices expiring within a week, it’s too late to agree on an election process involving hearings and parliamentary consent unless both parties take immediate action.

× An unprecedented Constitutional Court vacuum is unavoidable unless the ruling and opposition parties compromise.
✓ An unprecedented vacuum in the Constitutional Court is inevitable unless the ruling and opposition parties reach a compromise.

× No matter how dysfunctional politics may be, leaving a core constitutional institution to cease functioning is unimaginable.
✓ No matter how dysfunctional politics may become, allowing a core constitutional institution to cease functioning is unimaginable.

× If this stalemate continues, the conspiracy theory that “the opposition seeks to neutralize the Constitutional Court to carry out the impeachment process on their own” could become a reality.
✓ If this stalemate persists, the conspiracy theory that “the opposition seeks to neutralize the Constitutional Court to carry out the impeachment process on their own” could become a reality.

× To dispel suspicions that the main opposition party is intentionally paralyzing the Constitutional Court for political reasons, the Democratic Party must actively engage in the process of selecting the new justices.
✓ To dispel suspicions that the main opposition party is intentionally paralyzing the Constitutional Court for political purposes, the Democratic Party must actively engage in the selection process for the new justices.

× If reaching an agreement on the distribution of seats remains contentious, the ruling and opposition parties could begin by each electing one justice to restore the Constitutional Court’s ability to function.
✓ If agreeing on seat distribution remains contentious, the ruling and opposition parties could at least each elect one justice to restore the court’s ability to function.

A: Check the question to view the answer