4 hours ago, DarkHorse said:

https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Order_66

Rather than me quoting swathes of this page, you can read it for yourself. Tup is the name of the clone I was trying to think of.

"This chip contained clone protocol 66 which, when activated, would ensure total obedience in the clones and cause them to violently lash out against the Jedi."

So yeah, mind control.

To be fair, that's from a fan source, not an official one. The Star Wars Databank is the official warehousing of info, and the only thing it says is "But a hidden trigger implanted in every clone would soon change the galaxy forever; Palpatine, now known by the Jedi to be Darth Sidious, issued Order 66 -- naming every Jedi an enemy of the Republic and calling for their eradication. Clones turned on their longtime allies, slaughtering them across worlds and inside the Jedi Temple under the stewardship of Darth Vader. Ultimately, clone troopers proved to be Palpatine’s secret weapon in assuming control of the galaxy." While that does support the "ensure obedience" aspect of wookiepedia's assertion, it doesn't support the "violently lash out" part - as every clone in the film was acting with professional control and calm, not lashing at all. I would point to Commander Gree and Yoda on Kashyyyk as an example of this - they quietly attempted to sneak up on Yoda. That's the opposite of "violently" lashing out. There are many mood altering drugs that could be released to assuage anxiety or give a "fuzz" to logic centers in the brain that would make a subject more compliant to a received command. I would imagine a properly functioning chip (unlike Tup's) would perform more in this fashion than anything else.

That said, the effect of the chips is inconsequential to the narrative - the ST should decide what they want to run it as and go from there. There is ample real world evidence to make the need for the chip relatively minor, and so whether you wanted to use it as a manchurian candidate inducing device or not is personal preference. The only time the chip is seen in action is when it misfires due to an anomaly, and so because it is, by nature, a malfunction, the intended purpose and effects are left in doubt - in doubt enough, at least, for any ST to be able to narrate their desired appearance of behavior.

10 hours ago, Vondy said:

Are we sure the Clones considered the "lawfulness" of the order relevant? Was that a critical element when they were designed, programmed, conditioned, and trained? It seems to me like it was the exact opposite: that they were trained to be highly obedient shock troops who did not question their orders. I suspect the average clone trooper's answer to what a lawful order is would be "a lawful order is any order given by my superiors."

The debate was never about if the Clones considered the "lawfulness" of the order, rather, whether the order itself was lawful. The problem with attempting to consider the clones opinion in canon is that an observer who has a problem with Order 66 as a whole has already been unable to suspend their disbelief, and instead see the matter through their personal lens. My counter-argument in this case must then set General Order 66 in our world, and not Star Wars' to establish or refute the assertion of lawfulness.

Simply put, no, the clones wouldn't care about the lawfulness of the Order, specifically because even in our world it would be considered lawful, bur more importantly, the clones were Palpatine's end-game for establishing the Galactic Empire. I'm sure the Separatist Droids had a similar hidden order to eradicate the ruling body of the Separatist Allegiance - if the Seps won, then the Droids would eliminate the council and Darth Sidious would take over rulership, establishing the Galactic Empire. It's important to remember that Palpatine was running the whole war as a theater game, and regardless of which side came out on top, Palpatine was at the head of it.

The order might have been lawful if the Jedi actually were traitors to the Republic.

An order given to eliminate your own religious and political opposition by accusing them of a crime you know they are completely innocent of, that's not legal. That is a crime. That is high treason. That goes way beyond any special emergency powers you might have. Nevermind that the only reason you created this army and this civil war was so you would be able to give this order. It's premeditated to the point of there being secret mind control chips, designed to not show up in medical examinations, in your soldiers that nobody except you, the leader of the Seperatists, and a few Kaminoans know about.

2 hours ago, micheldebruyn said:

It's premeditated to the point of there being secret mind control chips, designed to not show up in medical examinations, in your soldiers that nobody except you, the leader of the Seperatists, and a few Kaminoans know about.

And anyone that finds out about it or even suspects it gets murdered to keep the conspiracy secret.

On 11/7/2019 at 4:45 AM, micheldebruyn said:

The order might have been lawful if the Jedi actually were traitors to the Republic.

An order given to eliminate your own religious and political opposition by accusing them of a crime you know they are completely innocent of, that's not legal. That is a crime. That is high treason. That goes way beyond any special emergency powers you might have. Nevermind that the only reason you created this army and this civil war was so you would be able to give this order. It's premeditated to the point of there being secret mind control chips, designed to not show up in medical examinations, in your soldiers that nobody except you, the leader of the Seperatists, and a few Kaminoans know about.

All that would be true, if it weren't for the fact that none of the justification behind its unlawfulness matters.

At the time the order was given, the Jedi had just attacked and attempted to kill the legally and rightfully elected Supreme Chancellor of the Republic with the only charge against him being "A Sith" levied by the testimony of a single Jedi, and without a trial, court hearing, or authorization from the Senate.

In any court of law, the second that Mace Windu attempted to kill a weaponless and surrendering Palpatine, he no longer could claim to be anything other than unlawful. At that moment, he became a traitor to the Republic, as he was about to kill in cold blood, without due process.

Now, had he been successful, and the facts around the matter been revealed as they were, he most likely would have been exonerated and his actions justified - it would really depend on how Anakin shook out. The problem is, he wasn't successful, and all facts pointed to an assassination and attempted coup. Thus, the Order, whether we like it or not, was legal.

It's important here in both yours and DarkHorse's objections, that you remember that LEGAL doesn't have to also mean MOR AL . In fact, most of the time, it doesn't. Morality is matter of philosophy, legality is matter of law and precedent. What is legal is determined of the combined agreements all members of a society create in order to live in a community, and while it is hopefully a moral and ethical community, and those laws were designed to support the general good and public prosperity, the laws are in no way required to be beholden of any social construct of acceptable behavior. This is one of those cases.

Regardless of Palpatine being a Sith, he is the duly elected Chancellor of the Republic. An Order given to eliminate your religious opposition (they were in no way, shape, or form his political opposition, as they were supposed to be loyal to the Republic and generals in the GAR, two institutions Palpatine was in charge of) because they engaged in treasonous activity is not illegal in any way, and was, specifically, the description of the General Order, which the Senate and the Jedi knew about. They engaged in treasonous activity the second they attempted to kill the Supreme Chancellor in place of accepting his surrender and thus deny him due process. Regardless of how the scene played out and what we as watchers of the movie know, the knowledge available to EVERYONE in the galaxy outside of Anakin and Palpatine (including the clones) was shaded as their perspectives dictate. History is written by the winner. Your argument that Order 66 wasn't legal, sadly, is just wrong, despite how unethical, immoral, and generally despicable the situation was.

Likewise, Yoda and Obi-Wan were engaging in treasonous activity trying to kill Palpatine and Anakin after they shut off the distress call in the Jedi Temple, because the law protected Palpatine and Anakin. The entire Rebel Alliance was engaging in illegal activity, for that matter, regardless of the moral and ethical correctness of the situation. Doing the RIGHT thing is, very often, totally illegal.

2 hours ago, Kyla said:

At the time the order was given, the Jedi had just attacked and attempted to kill the legally and rightfully elected Supreme Chancellor of the Republic with the only charge against him being "A Sith" levied by the testimony of a single Jedi, and without a trial, court hearing, or authorization from the Senate.

You genuinely and objectively scare me.

The statement quoted above is objectively false. "In the name of the Galactic Senate of the Republic, you are under arrest Chancellor." Are you threatening me, Master Jedi" "The Senate will decide your fate." "I am the Senate!" "Not. Yet."

Mace was acting legally in arresting Palpatine by the powers given to him by the Senate, powers Palpatine was looking to usurp but had not yet been granted, authority he is not given until he declares himself Emperor. Palpatine acted illegally in resisting arrest and then issued an illegal order in Clone Protocol 66. Just because you want Order 66 to be legal, it doesn't mean that it is. Just because Sheev got away with it, doesn't mean that it was legal.

2 hours ago, Kyla said:

All that would be true, if it weren't for the fact that none of the justification behind its unlawfulness matters.

At the time the order was given, the Jedi had just attacked and attempted to kill the legally and rightfully elected Supreme Chancellor of the Republic with the only charge against him being "A Sith" levied by the testimony of a single Jedi, and without a trial, court hearing, or authorization from the Senate.

The Jedi didn't attack Palpatine. They attempted to lawfully arrest him on charges of extermely high treason. Palpatine attacked them in response.

I have a question: in your mind, is it even theoretical possible for Palps to commit a crime?

Things get even more byzantine if one takes into account the history of the Republic and the Jedi Order. I have no idea how much of this was ret-conned out by story gurus/Disney, but the Republic and Jedi Order were both at war with the Sith for a long time (millenia), until about 1,000 years before TPM - at which point the remaining Sith basically went underground.

So it might conceivably still be written into the Republic's constitution/equivalent that the Sith are enemies of the state and/or that being a Sith is illegal.

Maybe the Jedi Order had full powers to apprehend and/or terminate Sith.

Not having seen TCW animated series, I have no idea how widespread the knowledge was that the leader of the CIS was not just a fallen Jedi, but a full-blown Sith. Certain parties (the Jedi, the Chancellor, etc.) might have been sitting on that information "so as not to cause a panic" (whether that reasoning was true or not).

13 hours ago, micheldebruyn said:

The Jedi didn't attack Palpatine. They attempted to lawfully arrest him on charges of extermely high treason. Palpatine attacked them in response.

I have a question: in your mind, is it even theoretical possible for Palps to commit a crime?

Again, as I said, you're speaking from the standpoint of a viewer of the movie, and not as a character in the movie. I can personally guarantee that in all probability every single US president and most likely all foreign leaders as well, have issued orders that are illegal within their country or the global court's rule of law, but none of it matters, because no one has any evidence or reason to believe they have done so. The same holds true here.

Order 66, when given in the context it was given, and with the knowledge that anyone receiving the order would know, was legal. Your pedantic "question" (which is actually an accusation that I would refuse to admit Palpatine was capable of possible wrongdoing) is pointless, because the act of committing a crime must be proven in a court of law, and that cannot happen until he is captured, arraigned for trial, and tried. Prior to that, he can be accused of a crime should reason and probable cause exist.

It's easy for you or I, as a godlike, omniscient observer from outside the movie, say, "Oh, right, Palpatine is really behind the Separatists, and a Sith who wants to destroy the Jedi, so what he did was manipulate the situation and he's totally the villain breaking the spirit of the Galactic Republics laws..." but that isn't the point that was being argued. The point being argued is whether a good soldier would follow the order as given, and to answer that question, one can only take into consideration the information available to the soldier at the time the order was given. The answer to that question is that the order, as perceived to be understood, and at the time it was received, would be a lawful order.

4 hours ago, Bellona said:

Things get even more byzantine if one takes into account the history of the Republic and the Jedi Order. I have no idea how much of this was ret-conned out by story gurus/Disney, but the Republic and Jedi Order were both at war with the Sith for a long time (millenia), until about 1,000 years before TPM - at which point the remaining Sith basically went underground.

So it might conceivably still be written into the Republic's constitution/equivalent that the Sith are enemies of the state and/or that being a Sith is illegal.

Maybe the Jedi Order had full powers to apprehend and/or terminate Sith.

Not having seen TCW animated series, I have no idea how widespread the knowledge was that the leader of the CIS was not just a fallen Jedi, but a full-blown Sith. Certain parties (the Jedi, the Chancellor, etc.) might have been sitting on that information "so as not to cause a panic" (whether that reasoning was true or not).

According to the new canon, the whole republic is only 1000 years old ( https://www.starwars.com/databank/galactic-republic ), created after the "100 years of darkness" that saw the Jedi battle the Sith. While it isn't inconceivable that the constitution of the Republic would mention the Sith in some capacity, there is absolutely nothing that confirms it, nor even suggests it, and likewise, nothing exists showing the Jedi Order to have any powers to terminate Sith either. Unfortunately, neither of those can be factored into the argument, because of this, though, to be fair, if we are operating from the perspective of the characters in the movie , as my argument was based, neither of those would matter because no one who was living outside of Anakin and Palpatine knew they were Sith . So regardless of the truth of the matter, there was no one to know when the Order was given.

Having seen every episode of both the original Tartakovski Clone Wars and the new Filloni Clone Wars, I can say that the Sith weren't discussed outside of the Jedi and the Chancellor (well, Padme knew because of Anakin) and it's not really clear if the return of the Sith was totally to be believed, as the order was considered extinct. Yoda and the Council knew far more about this than most, because the series gets into some really deep dives into the metaphysics of Star Wars, but towards the end of the series, Yoda himself starts getting the hairy eye-ball for his theories and beliefs.

14 hours ago, DarkHorse said:

You genuinely and objectively scare me.

The statement quoted above is objectively false. "In the name of the Galactic Senate of the Republic, you are under arrest Chancellor." Are you threatening me, Master Jedi" "The Senate will decide your fate." "I am the Senate!" "Not. Yet."

Mace was acting legally in arresting Palpatine by the powers given to him by the Senate, powers Palpatine was looking to usurp but had not yet been granted, authority he is not given until he declares himself Emperor. Palpatine acted illegally in resisting arrest and then issued an illegal order in Clone Protocol 66. Just because you want Order 66 to be legal, it doesn't mean that it is. Just because Sheev got away with it, doesn't mean that it was legal.

Again, you and I have the luxury of knowing what happened in that room because we saw it. No single clone trooper would in any way have access to that truth. As only living witnesses could explain the events, none of what you quoted would be told.

As far as what Mace did, he went with the Jedi to arrest Palpatine lawfully, then was attacked by Palpatine, and fought Palpatine and disarmed him, turned his lightning back upon him until he was exhausted and called Anakin for help, then Anakin told him Palpatine needed to be arrested, but Mace said he was too dangerous and needed to be killed.

At that exact point, he no longer was acting in accordance with law. Even US law states that you are not protected by self-defense (even cops) if you kill an unarmed and surrendering foe. Palpatine very clearly states, "please help me" to Anakin, implying his defenselessness. Now, whether or not Mace was acting lawfully (which would, had he survived, been decided by a court of law) let me be clear that from the perspective of an audience viewer I in now way am claiming he was wrong. He absolutely should have killed Palpatine, and he was 100% trying to do the best thing for the galaxy and the Republic, but that doesn't matter in the context of whether Order 66 was a lawful order or not. Because he didn't kill Palpatine, he died. He got killed by the only other "Jedi" that could tell the story as true, as we the viewers saw it. The second that happened, we cannot in any way, shape, or form, assume that anyone else in the universe would know what happened in that room unless they were told or saw the security footage for themselves.

What the canon explanation for the events as described by Palpatine was is this; Mace and his Jedi cronies stormed into his quarters, attacked him and ravaged his face, almost killed him, succeeding had not Vader arrived just in time to save his life and kill them.

Not a single Clone Trooper (except maybe the Coruscant Guard that were loyal to Palpatine personally) would have seen that footage or known what happened. So, when Palpatine made up the tale that the Jedi tried to kill him, he wasn't lying (even though they had a damned good reason to do it), and so the idea that Jedi were traitors to the Republic, as far as anyone would have known, was a reasonable possibility. In that context, a soldier on the ground couldn't have called the order unlawful.

From there, he created the Empire, and converted the democracy into a dictatorship, and so the only sane response of the people was Rebellion, that's how we get a lot of good movies, but it doesn't make the Rebellion legal, just right. The law is a poor judge of goodness. Slavery was legal, segregation was legal, neither of them were right, and they were both ended thanks to a lot of good people doing illegal things for the right reasons.

Laws must be constantly challenged to maintain their validity and security, being modified or struck down when they seek to protect the public interest. If you believe that the law is always right and cannot be misapplied or manipulated to protect the guilty, then, sir, you genuinely and objectively scare me.

My understanding on Palpatine framing the attack in the RotS novel (which I have not read and so this is coming off of what a friend told me years ago), was that as the Jedi came in to the Chancellors office, Palpatine recorded the conversation and was audibly pleading for his life, as he killed the other Jedi that came with Mace. He was able to then play that recording to the senate to convince them that it was the Jedi who attacked him in a coup attempt.

On a side note on resisting the chip, in the Asoka book (I have read this one) it was implied that Rex and a few other clones already had their chips out when Order 66 came, and they helped Asoka go into hiding and then the clones went into hiding. This would indicate that at least in that unit there was some resistance to the order, and with out the chip they would not have followed it. This was also in one unit though that had been encouraged to think for themselves though more than other clones (as shown in the Phong Krell story arc), so that may impact their thought process, in a similar manor to the clone commandos discussed earlier.

The chip story arc was my least favorite of the Clone Wars TV show (I really really like it outside of this arc). As to me it made the Jedi out to be really dumb, well we know this could happen, but they haven't done us any harm yet, so lets just keep the Clones and end the war before this chip goes off again. I hope if they do make another season of the show (I thought I herd some noise about this) that this story arc is explained more.

1 hour ago, Jedi Knight Xan said:

I hope if they do make another season of the show (I thought I herd some noise about this) that this story arc is explained more.

https://www.denofgeek.com/us/tv/star-wars/275013/star-wars-the-clone-wars-season-7-trailer-release-date-news

Feb 2020 on Disney+

7 hours ago, Kyla said:

Order 66, when given in the context it was given, and with the knowledge that anyone receiving the order would know, was legal. Your pedantic "question" (which is actually an accusation that I would refuse to admit Palpatine was capable of possible wrongdoing) is pointless, because the act of committing a crime must be proven in a court of law, and that cannot happen until he is captured, arraigned for trial, and tried. Prior to that, he can be accused of a crime should reason and probable cause exist.

Well, how is it even possible to get him to a court of law when the at of attemting to arrest him reason and probable cause like Mace Windu did is apparently considered a treasonous attack?

Again, I am completely serious: do you believe it is even hypothetically possible for Palpatine to commit legal wrongdoings?

2 hours ago, micheldebruyn said:

Well, how is it even possible to get him to a court of law when the at of attemting to arrest him reason and probable cause like Mace Windu did is apparently considered a treasonous attack?

Again, I am completely serious: do you believe it is even hypothetically possible for Palpatine to commit legal wrongdoings?

9 hours ago, Kyla said:

It's easy for you or I, as a godlike, omniscient observer from outside the movie, say, "Oh, right, Palpatine is really behind the Separatists, and a Sith who wants to destroy the Jedi, so what he did was manipulate the situation and he's totally the villain breaking the spirit of the Galactic Republics laws..." but that isn't the point that was being argued.

As you see, I've answered that question. The fact that you continue to ask is either disingenuous or an indication that I either cannot explain the matter clearly to you or you lack the desire or ability to understand.

Palpatine as Supreme Chancellor of the Republic can absolutely, 100% break laws and commit legal wrongdoings, but in order for that to mean anything at all it must be proven in a court of law. Over the course of Episode 3, and in the (Legends) novels stretching all the way back to pre-Episode 1, he and his former Master Plagueis commit a plethora of criminal violations and legal wrongdoings. The problem is that none of those are brought to light within the universe.

After Palpatine becomes Emperor and establishes the New Order, he eliminates the court system and all political and social opponents that could attempt to bring him to justice. The Rebellion to Restore the Republic is created to re-establish an agency capable of trying him in abstention (as everyone knew they would have to kill him to remove him from power - the hope of bringing him to justice may have been there but I doubt anyone expected it) and bring those that followed his order to account in the New Republic. Your question isn't as easy as "yes" he can commit legal wrongdoing. It's complex and thought provoking - it was intended to be - and to boil it down to sitting on a high horse saying "in a perfect world everyone would know" is self-delusion.

I live in a country where my President is corrupt and breaking laws left and right, and I can do precisely nothing about it save for shout out the warnings until the system processes it as it was designed to do. However, if that system were not in place, then the only option left to me would be rebellion. That scenario has played out time and time again in our world, from France to the Middle East, from America in the 1700's to Ireland much more recently. It's playing out now in Hong Kong and the only truth that has come out of it is that history is dictated by the winner. Had Germany won World War II, Hitler wouldn't have been the villain, and had America lost the Revolutionary War, Washington wouldn't have been a hero, regardless of how right or wrong they were.

In the US, they are actually labeling the Trail of Tears as a voluntary exodus of the Native Americans in history books now, and all I can do is shout to anyone that will listen that this isn't right. The protesters of the Dakota Pipeline were jailed for their actions to warn people of the dangers of the pipeline, reporters had their rights denied and were incarcerated and fired for covering the protests. That was 2015, and here we are four years later, with those very warnings now having come to pass. You have the nerve to accuse me of being incapable of recognizing the role of law in good and bad? I see it constantly, and am forced to report it, and explain it to my community on a nearly daily basis, and let me tell you, the importance of someone "committing legal wrongdoings" is insignificant to the weight of action needed to see Justice served to that individual when they do.

6 hours ago, micheldebruyn said:

Well, how is it even possible to get him to a court of law when the at of attemting to arrest him reason and probable cause like Mace Windu did is apparently considered a treasonous attack?

I think a large part of the issue is that we don't know how the Republic's legal system actually works (apart from probably not very well given the deep levels of corruption in the Galactic Senate).

Mace's efforts to arrest the Chancellor may well be akin to a citizen's arrest, with the Jedi having no legal authority to make arrests or detain suspects. It's much like members of an organized religion (which is what the Jedi Order ultimately is) not having any special authority to arrest or detain a suspect in the United States beyond those provisions made for a citizen's arrest. It'd be akin to a Catholic bishop and some local priests striding into the Oval Office and demanding the sitting President surrender to face charges of high treason. Doesn't matter if the President in question is guilty or not, the bishop simply doesn't have the legal authority to make that arrest for those charges.

Again, depending on the legal code (especially after Palps or his supporters had a chance to monkey with it during the years he's been in office), Mace's actions could very well be illegal, even if well-intended, as he was acting outside of the Jedi Order's recognized capacity as generals for the Grand Army. Sure, the Jedi could arrest, detain, and confront Separatist commanding officers without issue, as those individuals already already openly declared and committed treasonous action against the Republic. With Palps, it may well be a case of "we know everything, but can prove nothing" to pull a line from Enter the Dragon. Granted, this comes from Legends, but it'd been cited in a few prequel-era books that the Senate was become less and less trusting of the Jedi Order (subtle machinations of Palps more likely than not) and thus the Order had fewer and fewer resources and special privileges than they'd had prior to Chancellor Valorum's forced departure. Yet again, we don't know the Republic legal code, mostly as it's not relevant to the larger story. All we know is that the Jedi are supposed to be the good guys, and that Palps is the villain responsible for the war, which don't have any impact on legality. The Rebel Alliance was itself an illegal military force, and Han Solo a known criminal, yet they're the good guys in the original films while Imperials that are operating within their legal authority (twisted as it might be) are the villains, so morality and legality are two separate things.

Now, I agree with you that Palpatine in this instance is indeed guilty as sin, seeing as how he's been playing both sides against each other from the very start, and that Mace was well within his rights to detain/dispatch the Sith Lord that had co-opted the Republic's government. But as Palps still had the authority of the Supreme Chancellor at the point in time in which he issued Order 66, given that the only people who knew about Mace's efforts to arrest Palps were either on his side (Anakin) or were dead (Mace & Co.), so his issuing of the order was still a legal action given his position as the GAR's commander-in-chief, however immoral it may be.

Of course, we have no idea what steps Palps took (beyond the then-illegal Blockade of Naboo) to secure the position of Supreme Chancellor for himself, which may have been highly illegal, thus casting the legitimacy and legality of his entire time as Supreme Chancellor into question, but that's a whole 'nother can of worms.

37 minutes ago, Donovan Morningfire said:

I think a large part of the issue is that we don't know how the Republic's legal system actually works (apart from probably not very well given the deep levels of corruption in the Galactic Senate).

Mace's efforts to arrest the Chancellor may well be akin to a citizen's arrest, with the Jedi having no legal authority to make arrests or detain suspects. It's much like members of an organized religion (which is what the Jedi Order ultimately is) not having any special authority to arrest or detain a suspect in the United States beyond those provisions made for a citizen's arrest. It'd be akin to a Catholic bishop and some local priests striding into the Oval Office and demanding the sitting President surrender to face charges of high treason. Doesn't matter if the President in question is guilty or not, the bishop simply doesn't have the legal authority to make that arrest for those charges.

This analogy isn't very apropos. We see on screen that the Jedi were directly integrated into the Republic military as generals and commanders, and the Jedi Council is shown acting as in a capacity akin to the joint chiefs or a supreme council of war. They also served as formally appointed diplomats in the Old Republic. And, in the Clone Wars series, we see them tasked by Palpatine and the Senate with special investigations that would normally be handled by law enforcement or intelligence agencies. The Jedi clearly did serve in an official governmental capacity. No Catholic bishop would seek such functions. That's not his job. Let alone the fact that, in the US we have the separation of church and state, separation of powers, and the posse comitatus act to prevent that from happening. The Republic? Not so much. The Jedi are presented as being cops, diplomats, soldiers, and spies. Indeed, I would suggest that being so entwined in the functions of state is what led to their downfall.

13 hours ago, Vondy said:

This analogy isn't very apropos. We see on screen that the Jedi were directly integrated into the Republic military as generals and commanders, and the Jedi Council is shown acting as in a capacity akin to the joint chiefs or a supreme council of war. They also served as formally appointed diplomats in the Old Republic. And, in the Clone Wars series, we see them tasked by Palpatine and the Senate with special investigations that would normally be handled by law enforcement or intelligence agencies. The Jedi clearly did serve in an official governmental capacity. No Catholic bishop would seek such functions. That's not his job. Let alone the fact that, in the US we have the separation of church and state, separation of powers, and the posse comitatus act to prevent that from happening. The Republic? Not so much. The Jedi are presented as being cops, diplomats, soldiers, and spies. Indeed, I would suggest that being so entwined in the functions of state is what led to their downfall.

I believe that this is more akin to the correct idea. Order 66 specifically states "Jedi Officers" and references that their removal will break the chain of command. As such, Mace's actions would be seen as one of the Joint Chiefs attempting to relieve the Commander in Chief from duty, and arrest him on grounds of treason. No, this is where we need to consider that Galactic Republic law is different than US law, as the only means by which a sitting President could be removed from office and arrested is through an act of Impeachment by the House. It seems here (based on Mace's words) that the Chancellor of the Republic could still have charges levied against them and arrested (something that Constitutional Law is quite fuzzy on). Moreover, a large number of the "Special Powers" that Palpatine moved to the office of the Chancellor had to with the militarization of the Republic and the GAR taking over "peacekeeping" duties during wartime - similar to the US and their Martial Law provisions. This would indicate that Mace and the Jedi Order would have the authority to arrest or detain anyone that they needed to.

It should, however, also be noted that assuming Mace and the Jedi in someway deputized like they were in Star Wars, then they were lawful in their attempt to arrest Palpatine, and (while there isn't necessarily a guaranty of it) even killing him when he resisted by US law. What changes is that when Mace, alone (aside from Anakin - or so he believed) attempted to kill Palpatine after Palpatine ceased resisting and was on the ground (an important precedent of US Law) he no longer was acting legally within the confines of US Law. Now, we do not know if Republic law was different we have to assume, though, that it was as we already know it is different in regard to the removal of powers provision of the Chancellor/President. Without GL or Disney NewCanon to speak to the point, however, we just have to guess. I would assume that there was some legal provisio that allowed for the termination of criminals that the arresting officer deemed too dangerous for trial/containment. I would imagine that it would still result in Senatorial and/or Criminal investigation to validate the use of such provision, but it's reasonable to assume it both existed and what Mace was acting under.

On 11/11/2019 at 2:13 AM, Kyla said:

According to the new canon, the whole republic is only 1000 years old ( https://www.starwars.com/databank/galactic-republic ) , created after the "100 years of darkness" that saw the Jedi battle the Sith. While it isn't inconceivable that the constitution of the Republic would mention the Sith in some capacity, there is absolutely nothing that confirms it, nor even suggests it, and likewise, nothing exists showing the Jedi Order to have any powers to terminate Sith either. Unfortunately, neither of those can be factored into the argument, because of this, though, to be fair, if we are operating from the perspective of the characters in the movie , as my argument was based, neither of those would matter because no one who was living outside of Anakin and Palpatine knew they were Sith . So regardless of the truth of the matter, there was no one to know when the Order was given.

Having seen every episode of both the original Tartakovski Clone Wars and the new Filloni Clone Wars, I can say that the Sith weren't discussed outside of the Jedi and the Chancellor (well, Padme knew because of Anakin) and it's not really clear if the return of the Sith was totally to be believed, as the order was considered extinct. Yoda and the Council knew far more about this than most, because the series gets into some really deep dives into the metaphysics of Star Wars, but towards the end of the series, Yoda himself starts getting the hairy eye-ball for his theories and beliefs.

Ah, those ret-cons that people either love or hate. They make it next to impossible to come to one definite conclusion when the canon goal-posts keep moving, not mention the different levels of canon.

As for the Republic being only 1,000 years old - that could be seen as being the Republic since the Ruusan Reformation.

12 hours ago, Bellona said:

Ah, those ret-cons that people either love or hate. They make it next to impossible to come to one definite conclusion when the canon goal-posts keep moving, not mention the different levels of canon.

As for the Republic being only 1,000 years old - that could be seen as being the Republic since the Ruusan Reformation.

Which is how the old canon saw it as well. Remember Obi-Wan's line from A New Hope : "For over a thousand generations , the Jedi Knights were guardians of peace and justice in the Old Republic; before the Dark times; before the Empire."

4 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Which is how the old canon saw it as well. Remember Obi-Wan's line from A New Hope : "For over a thousand generations , the Jedi Knights were guardians of peace and justice in the Old Republic; before the Dark times; before the Empire."

A generation is not a year, it's approximately 25 years. So Obi-wan is saying "For over 25,000 years , the Jedi Knights were guardians of peace and justice in the Old Republic; before the Dark times; before the Empire."

He might have said that, but it's pretty much established at this point that taking his statements at face value is inadvisable. Even if he wasn't pulling a certain (conveniently symbolic) point of view of his own accord, the order may well have been when they taught him that history.

On 11/12/2019 at 5:48 AM, Bellona said:

Ah, those ret-cons that people either love or hate. They make it next to impossible to come to one definite conclusion when the canon goal-posts keep moving, not mention the different levels of canon.

8 hours ago, Jareth Valar said:

A generation is not a year, it's approximately 25 years. So Obi-wan is saying "For over 25,000 years , the Jedi Knights were guardians of peace and justice in the Old Republic; before the Dark times; before the Empire."

This is a can of worms for another thread, but, yea, I feel you both on this one. It takes a lot of serious mental gymnastics to align everything, and it forced me to make a few concessions in my campaign to have everything established in canon actually work (like the appearance of Revan and Bane). The fact that according to the new canon the Jedi defeated the Sith at the end of the "Hundred Years of Darkness" after a rogue Jedi formed the Sith. Since we know that the Jedi defeated the Sith "a millenium ago" from the Databank at starwars.com, that means the Sith and Jedi have been fighting for about 1,100 years, making the Jedi Order younger than Christianity.

Hopefully, the Jedi defeating the Sith after the "Hundred Years of Darkness" and the eventual war that saw the Jedi render the Sith extinct and take their place as guardians of the Republic will be shown to be different, and we have a little more history to work with, but with the Benioff and Weis trilogy no more, I don't know...

16 hours ago, Jareth Valar said:

A generation is not a year, it's approximately 25 years. So Obi-wan is saying "For over 25,000 years , the Jedi Knights were guardians of peace and justice in the Old Republic; before the Dark times; before the Empire."

Exactly . The Old Republic was far older than 1,000 years. This is why when the line in the Prequels made the claim that the Republic was only 1000 years old, The Ruusan Reformations retcon stating that the Republic was reorganized after the Battle of Ruusan, around 1000 years before the movies, came into being in order to explain that discrepancy.

22 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Exactly . The Old Republic was far older than 1,000 years. This is why when the line in the Prequels made the claim that the Republic was only 1000 years old, The Ruusan Reformations retcon stating that the Republic was reorganized after the Battle of Ruusan, around 1000 years before the movies, came into being in order to explain that discrepancy.

The Ruusan Reformations are Legends, material, not canon. While Ruusan hasn't been specifically overwritten with something else, acting on the assumption it still applies isn't advised. The issue is still in flux, especially with the former Benioff and Weis trilogy now being helmed by a new team and having been rumored to handle the Republic time period.

Just now, Kyla said:

The Ruusan Reformations are Legends, material, not canon. While Ruusan hasn't been specifically overwritten with something else, acting on the assumption it still applies isn't advised. The issue is still in flux, especially with the former Benioff and Weis trilogy now being helmed by a new team and having been rumored to handle the Republic time period.

That’s not the point I’m making. The point is that the Ruusan Reformations were introduced because of a discrepancy within the movies themselves regarding the age of the Republic. That being a thousand generations as stated in the original films, vs a thousand years , as stated in the Prequels.

2 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:

That’s not the point I’m making. The point is that the Ruusan Reformations were introduced because of a discrepancy within the movies themselves regarding the age of the Republic. That being a thousand generations as stated in the original films, vs a thousand years , as stated in the Prequels.

Sorry, I didn't see that you were clarifying the Old Republic versus Galactic Republic part of the problem and not implying that the Ruusan Reformations is the canon explanation for the 1000 years versus 1000 generations discrepancy.