First of all I would like to apologize for the delay, the holidays have distracted me from the appeal.
Ok, certiorari is granted. Appellant and appellee, we await your arguments.
Thank you for considering the case, justice.
While Dibble's ruling may appear to be the common sense reading of the law, IDS adapted such law when the region only
elected one office - the Governor. I believe Dibble broke both federal and regional constitutions in his reading of the law. The IDS law clearly states that the office must be stated in the ballot when cast. By ignoring the IDS Constitution, Dibble also broke the federal Constitution's due process requirement - following the law. Furthermore, I would like also to provide an example of potential future interpretation of the IDS Constitution and law following Dibble's ruling:
Example Ballot:
Governor:
Candidate A
Candidate B
Legislation:
Candidate C
Candidate D
Candidate E
Voter's Ballot:
Candidate A
Candidate C
Candidate D
Certification following Dibble's interpretation: Voter voted for candidate C in for Governor, candidates A & D for legislature.(Let's say in this case the election officials want to elect B, D, E in this case). This interpretation of the law leads to absurdity that should not be tolerated in Atlasia. I believe that letting PiT's certification and Dibble's ruling stand would set Atlasia on a dark path towards unfair elections, disregard of the law, and insult to the Constitution. I agree that discounting 12 votes is unfair to the voters, but disregarding the law and the Constitution is unacceptable to all of Atlasia's citizens.