Public Discussion on the Supreme Court Cases (Avoid Cluttering Case Threads)

[Poirot]

In the Poirot vs SoFE Peebs case, the defense stated

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm trying to find what law required the SoFE to open the booth August 4.

The reason for the 72 hours public notice is for a minimum time for the public to be aware an election is coming, for people to make decision to run and officially declare because declaration must happen at least 24 hours before the start of the election and not sure if it's required by law anymore but ideally post a sample ballot so there is time to correct if there are mistakes.

Announcing an election about 8 hours before it starts is candidate suppression since it's too late to be on the ballot at the time the public is informed.

When the proposal for House was introduced in the constitutional convention it specified special elections shall begin within ten days of the vacancy occuring.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The 10 days covered cases when the vacancy occurs too close to the Friday to have a proper election. It is legal to skip one Friday to have the election the following one. I don't see a debate on the provisions for House special election in the pages after that but the 10 days vanished and is not in the final version in the constitution. I guess it was a victim of trying to keep the constitution as short as possible.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I will note that I fully expected the special election to be the following weekend and was surprised to find it underway when I came on early Friday morning

[Fmr. Representative Encke]

Doesn't this sort of need to be finished before the election so we know who to put on the ballot?

[Fmr. Representative Encke]

On the topic of 1184AZ v Peebs:

The key word in the case is the use of the word 'persons' rather than 'registered voters' or 'citizens;' if either of those words had been used, moving regions after deregistration and reregistration would be legal, as a deregistered person would cease to be a registered voter or a citizen. Since the word 'persons' is used, it applies to all individuals, even those not temporarily registered in-game, and thus the 180-day rule still stands for people who have deregistered and then reregistered.

[Terry the Fat Shark]

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=273087.0 I mean this lawsuit kind of seems pointless, since a new bill is going to change the definitions and such and make this clear anywho.

[Mr. Reactionary]

Itll be interesting to see what happens if the Supreme Court ever decides to hear the pending case, since the new session starts tomorrow, and chamber membership might be subject to change after the session starts. I wonder what happens to any chamber vote that is participated in by someone later found to not be the delegate.
Oh well. We have forever I guess.

[Sestak]

For reference in both the Turner case and in general, is the disastrous Chevron v. NRDC standard still in effect in Atlasia?

[Mr. Reactionary]

For reference in both the Turner case and in general, is the disastrous Chevron v. NRDC standard still in effect in Atlasia?

If so, I am trained in the art of administrative law, and I even pay the vba their annual $30 to let me say that.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

So when are we actually getting a ruling in TimTurner v. Peebs?

[windjammer]

So when are we actually getting a ruling in TimTurner v. Peebs?

Soon,
The SC is currently debating about it.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Quick someone get my coffee and popcorn.

[Poirot]

How does the jury work? I think every juror post a verdict so it doesn't have to be a unanimous decision. After all sides have pleaded, do jurors have discussion or have to keep to themselves, individual thoughts and decision so there is no influencing between them.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

This gonna be good.

[_]

Oh god yes I can hear the REEEEs now

[Filinovich]

This gonna be good.

[Poirot]

Maybe Justice Gass will have to recuse himself from the 1184AZ v Peebs case on party merger. He is quoted in the filing suit when he changed back registration to Labor and didn't like the automatic party change so it's difficult to look impartial.

Almost four months after the merger is kind of late to make it illegal, it's been ok for many months but it's not anymore. Maybe it's a case in theory for fututre mergers. 

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Maybe Justice Gass will have to recuse himself from the 1184AZ v Peebs case on party merger. He is quoted in the filing suit when he changed back registration to Labor and didn't like the automatic party change so it's difficult to look impartial.

Almost four months after the merger is kind of late to make it illegal, it's been ok for many months but it's not anymore. Maybe it's a case in theory for fututre mergers. 

I was actually organizing a lawsuit with Bacon King on much the same grounds back in March, but he disappeared during the discussions.

[Poirot]

But anyone who felt wronged or found it illegal back then could have started a court case. Maybe there is a time limit for court case like there is for challenging an election result.

[Poirot]

Would a court case resulting from challenging the result of the Fremont election be heard by the Fremont regional justice since it's a regional election and you need to know regional election laws or all the justices ? 

[ilikeverin]

You’re claiming that Pericles vote is invalid because he posted, and then deleted a ballot- something which you also allegedly did.

If this court rules Pericles vote invalid, then your vote would also be invalid. It’s not a seperate issue- it occurred in the exactly same election. It’s really quite simple.

No, you don't seem to understand how this works. Each case is separate. I'm suing over Pericles ballot. The sole issue of this case is his ballot. No one's else ballot is being considered here. Someone would have to file a separate case over that.

The Supreme Court Justices has around 15 years of combined experience in Atlasia; including at every level of service. We make mistakes; but you’re in the wrong here.

Ahem, I would like to point out that one of the justices has on an individual basis 14 years of experience in Atlasia   You whippersnappers should add your totals to mine.

[Fmr. Representative Encke]

On the topic of 1184AZ v Peebs, I made a similar point last year as a response to last year's less detailed but similar 1184AZ v Peebs (which was withdrawn almost immediately due to possible conflict of interest). Glad to see this issue is being addressed again.

On the topic of 1184AZ v Peebs:

The key word in the case is the use of the word 'persons' rather than 'registered voters' or 'citizens;' if either of those words had been used, moving regions after deregistration and reregistration would be legal, as a deregistered person would cease to be a registered voter or a citizen. Since the word 'persons' is used, it applies to all individuals, even those not temporarily registered in-game, and thus the 180-day rule still stands for people who have deregistered and then reregistered.

[Bacon King]

good to be back 

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

good to be back 

December 8th is a magical day. You get to be Attorney General again and I got to administer Senate stuff for the first time since July 2014.

[P. Clodius Pulcher did nothing wrong]

Wait, this is the second 1184AZ vs. Peebs?!

[Pericles]

Wait, this is the second 1184AZ vs. Peebs?!

I thought there were 3.