Suburban New Jersey Conservative v Tack50, MB, LouisvilleThunder, Adam Griffin

[S019]

Honorable Justices,

I would like to ask for greater oversight on Discord. All of the above users, were involved in Discord discussions, which were to some extent, racist. They had said that immigrants have poor grammar, and compared someone's political views to the caste system, this was even more offensive, given that, that someone was Hindu. I would like for the justices to issue a broad ruling on this unregulated off-site messaging app. Since, Congress has already failed to take action, I feel that this is the only place, where action on this issue, can truly occur.

Thank you for your time,
SNJC

[Mr. Reactionary]

Racist language isn't illegal though and the Supreme Court cant prosecute non-crimes. Nor can it impose rules on a 3rd party platform like Discord.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Also what crime has been committed here anyway?

[KoopaDaQuick 🇵🇸]

This is a joke.

Okay, so what if these four users have engaged in heavily racist conversation? Is that a bad thing? Definitely. Should they be formally punished? No. If you want to campaign against these gentlemen for these actions, go ahead, have fun. But this should definitely not be taken to the Supreme Court. If anything, SNJC should be punished for wasting an entire thread on a case as silly and unneeded as this.

[tmthforu94]

As a reminder, public discussion of Supreme Court cases is not encouraged in the case thread, it should take place here.

[Lumine]

Indeed, future comments outside the response from those directly involved must be directed to the discussion thread.

[Former President tack50]

I would like to ask the Honorable Justices to dismiss this frivolous case.

First of all, mostly because there is no case. A case can only be brought if there is a law being broken, but as per the Justice Code of Atlasia, none of the defendants have broken any particular law. In fact, not even the prosecution is making an argument for that! So we can't really be found out as guilty of anything.

Secondly, even if those statements were illegal to make, they weren't made in Atlas. And regardless of the platform, those statments are well under the premises and limitations of free speech in the Republic of Atlasia.

Since there has been no crime commited and no laws have been broken, I would like the judges to dismiss the case. While I do admit a civil suit based on damages might be at least legally viable, we don't really have a Civil Code, nor any way to pay those damages or any way to enforce the veredict.

If the Justices still decide to take this thread I would like to add the fact that I was not involved, in any way shape or form in those statments. Those controversial statments never came out of my mouth (or to be precise, my PC's keyboard). As such there is no reason to open a case against me. I also believe that to be the case with MB.

It also seems that the prosecution is trying to make the argument that Discord should be ruled unconstitutional somehow. But that is not really possible as it would infringe on the free speech rights of the citizens of this Republic. And even if the court were to make that decision, it would be a completely unenforceable ruling, as well as overturning the previous case of People's Republic of Atlasia v Ninja (where Ninja was cleared of deleting public records for making discussion about a law on Discord or something like that, I'm not fully sure about the details)

Finally, just in case this somehow is considered a criminal case against myself, I would like to exercise my constitutional right to counsel and announce my intention to plead non-guilty.

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

I concur with Tack50's statement.

[Mr. Reactionary]

I would like to ask the Honorable Justices to dismiss this frivolous case.

First of all, mostly because there is no case. A case can only be brought if there is a law being broken, but as per the Justice Code of Atlasia, none of the defendants have broken any particular law. In fact, not even the prosecution is making an argument for that! So we can't really be found out as guilty of anything.

Secondly, even if those statements were illegal to make, they weren't made in Atlas. And regardless of the platform, those statments are well under the premises and limitations of free speech in the Republic of Atlasia.

Since there has been no crime commited and no laws have been broken, I would like the judges to dismiss the case. While I do admit a civil suit based on damages might be at least legally viable, we don't really have a Civil Code, nor any way to pay those damages or any way to enforce the veredict.

If the Justices still decide to take this thread I would like to add the fact that I was not involved, in any way shape or form in those statments. Those controversial statments never came out of my mouth (or to be precise, my PC's keyboard). As such there is no reason to open a case against me. I also believe that to be the case with MB.

It also seems that the prosecution is trying to make the argument that Discord should be ruled unconstitutional somehow. But that is not really possible as it would infringe on the free speech rights of the citizens of this Republic. And even if the court were to make that decision, it would be a completely unenforceable ruling, as well as overturning the previous case of People's Republic of Atlasia v Ninja (where Ninja was cleared of deleting public records for making discussion about a law on Discord or something like that, I'm not fully sure about the details)

Finally, just in case this somehow is considered a criminal case against myself, I would like to exercise my constitutional right to counsel and announce my intention to plead non-guilty.

I agree. Just remember, multiple justices dont believe in standing and basically subscribe to a Mad Libs view of court cases whereby any noun can sue any noun for any noun.

Pork and beans can sue the sky for too many bees.

[S019]

I would like to clarify that I am not asking the justices to discipline the above users, they may choose to or choose not to, that is the justices' prerogative. I am asking the justices to issue a sweeping ruling on the unregulated off-site chatroom called Discord, I would like for them to clarify what can and cannot be posted there, and create a formal ruling on what exactly can be transferred from Discord to Atlas

[Former President tack50]

I would like to clarify that I am not asking the justices to discipline the above users, they may choose to or choose not to, that is the justices' prerogative. I am asking the justices to issue a sweeping ruling on the unregulated off-site chatroom called Discord, I would like for them to clarify what can and cannot be posted there, and create a formal ruling on what exactly can be transferred from Discord to Atlas

Well, it is my belief that we already have a clear law regarding Discord and what people can and can't post there.

Article I.2 of the Constitution of the Republic of Atlasia

Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, nor of the press, nor withholding the freedom to peaceably assemble and to petition for the redress of grievances.

I'm pretty sure that basically anything that isn't related to legislation is able to be posted on Discord and well within the confines of free speech. At least under the current law (maybe if that Discord bill had passed, you would be able to sue based on that bill for harrassment or libel)

The case People of the Republic of Atlasia v. Ninja0428 is also a Discord-related case (the only one to my knowledge). Since it was a criminal case and not one related to legislation, we didn't get any statements from the justices, but still does set the precedent that talking about stuff in Discord is definitely legal.

I will ask you again, which law were we allegedly breaking by talking in Discord? Here's a copy of the Criminal Justice Act, as posted by the Attorney General:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=315530.msg6706400#msg6706400

You also have the Constitutions of Lincoln and Atlasia in the Wiki as well as their statute.

[windjammer]

Well,

Suburban New Jersey Conservative, to answer your question, the Supreme Court takes into account anything that happens on discord.

[S019]

The criminal code is too narrow

This would be Misuse of Office, if they were Cabinet officials

Also they did use racial epithets, which should qualify as obscene language

I would like to ask the justices to expand the criminal code, as well

[Southern Delegate matthew27]

The criminal code is too narrow

This would be Misuse of Office, if they were Cabinet officials

Also they did use racial epithets, which should qualify as obscene language

I would like to ask the justices to expand the criminal code, as well

Shoudln't racial epithets be considered freedom of speech? You do know that this is government matters so the first amendment does apply.

[S019]

The criminal code is too narrow

This would be Misuse of Office, if they were Cabinet officials

Also they did use racial epithets, which should qualify as obscene language

I would like to ask the justices to expand the criminal code, as well

Shoudln't racial epithets be considered freedom of speech? You do know that this is government matters so the first amendment does apply.

No, you should also be added to this case with your language. Racial epithets are evil words, why would you defend them?