SR 113-36: Domestic Tranquility Amendment for Atlasia (Amendment Vote)

[PPT Spiral]

Nay

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Nay

[Deep Dixieland Senator, Muad'dib (OSR MSR)]

Aye

[Adam Griffin]

Nay

[Utah Neolib]

Abstain

[Deep Dixieland Senator, Muad'dib (OSR MSR)]

Should the current amendment vote fail, in order to ensure fairness and consistency across the board I propose the following amendment.

An Amendment to the Fifth Constitution of Atlasia
To truly preserve the stability, integrity, and democratic nature of the Republic by excluding the disruptive force to the very foundation of Atlasia itself

Section 1. Title

This shall be known as the Domestic Tranquility Amendment for Atlasia.

Article I of the Constitution of Atlasia shall be amended as follows:

Section 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the Republic of Atlasia, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, except those explicitly listed on Article I, Section 15, are citizens of the Republic of Atlasia and of the Region in which they reside, and shall in all cases be afforded equal protection under the law.

Section 15.

Although no Bill of attainder may be passed by either the Senate or the Regions, this Constitution reserves the exceptional right to exclude individuals from citizenship in the Republic of Atlasia, in order to preserve the stability, integrity, and democratic nature of the Republic.

The following individuals under their current or future username or verified sock accounts of the listed individuals, are hereby listed as excluded from such rights in perpetuity and shall not be permitted to hold any office, elected or appointed, or vote in any election, in any region or any other entity under jurisdiction of this Constitution:

-TexasConservative, also known as Young Texan, until January 1, 2028.
-Harry S Truman, also known as Unconditional Surrender Truman, until January 1, 2027.
-OBD, also known as Oregon Blue Dog, until January 1, 2027.

Article VIII of the Constitution of Atlasia shall be amended as follows:

Section 2. Supremacy of the Atlas Forum.
1. Actions taken by Administrators or Moderators of the Atlas Forum are separate and distinct from their actions as citizens of Atlasia and they shall not be restricted, nor obstructed by Atlasian constitutional or statutory provision, in their enforcement of the Terms of Service by Atlasian constitutional or statutory provision.
2. Nothing in this section shall be construed as to provide immunity to moderators who violate any
statutory provision that does not conflict with or obstruct enforcement of the terms of service.
3. Administrators and Moderators of the Atlas Forum shall be permitted to declare an account to be a sock account for the purpose of compliance with Article I, Section 15.

Amendment Explanation

The addition of Section 15 to Article I establishes a mechanism to ensure that individuals who threaten the very existence of this game we know and love as Atlasia can be banned through the highest legal means there is -- the amending process of the federal Constitution. The addition of the third clause to Article VIII, Section 2 allows the forum moderators and administrators to be able to enforce the banning of users through sock checks as a banned user may make a sock account to go around the game ban.

[West_Midlander]

I propose this addition as WD was a major actor in favor of the attempted self coup of last year.

Should the current amendment vote fail, in order to ensure fairness and consistency across the board I propose the following amendment.

An Amendment to the Fifth Constitution of Atlasia
To truly preserve the stability, integrity, and democratic nature of the Republic by excluding the disruptive force to the very foundation of Atlasia itself

Section 1. Title

This shall be known as the Domestic Tranquility Amendment for Atlasia.

Article I of the Constitution of Atlasia shall be amended as follows:

Section 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the Republic of Atlasia, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, except those explicitly listed on Article I, Section 15, are citizens of the Republic of Atlasia and of the Region in which they reside, and shall in all cases be afforded equal protection under the law.

Section 15.

Although no Bill of attainder may be passed by either the Senate or the Regions, this Constitution reserves the exceptional right to exclude individuals from citizenship in the Republic of Atlasia, in order to preserve the stability, integrity, and democratic nature of the Republic.

The following individuals under their current or future username or verified sock accounts of the listed individuals, are hereby listed as excluded from such rights in perpetuity and shall not be permitted to hold any office, elected or appointed, or vote in any election, in any region or any other entity under jurisdiction of this Constitution:

-TexasConservative, also known as Young Texan, until January 1, 2028.
-Harry S Truman, also known as Unconditional Surrender Truman, until January 1, 2027.
-OBD, also known as Oregon Blue Dog, until January 1, 2027.
-WD, also known as Western Democrat, until January 1, 2027.

Article VIII of the Constitution of Atlasia shall be amended as follows:

Section 2. Supremacy of the Atlas Forum.
1. Actions taken by Administrators or Moderators of the Atlas Forum are separate and distinct from their actions as citizens of Atlasia and they shall not be restricted, nor obstructed by Atlasian constitutional or statutory provision, in their enforcement of the Terms of Service by Atlasian constitutional or statutory provision.
2. Nothing in this section shall be construed as to provide immunity to moderators who violate any
statutory provision that does not conflict with or obstruct enforcement of the terms of service.
3. Administrators and Moderators of the Atlas Forum shall be permitted to declare an account to be a sock account for the purpose of compliance with Article I, Section 15.

Amendment Explanation

The addition of Section 15 to Article I establishes a mechanism to ensure that individuals who threaten the very existence of this game we know and love as Atlasia can be banned through the highest legal means there is -- the amending process of the federal Constitution. The addition of the third clause to Article VIII, Section 2 allows the forum moderators and administrators to be able to enforce the banning of users through sock checks as a banned user may make a sock account to go around the game ban.

[WD]

Lol.

Objecting.

[OBD]

Oh no if you put me in the Constitution I’d be so owned 😛

[S019]

Is there any particular reason to ban these people from voting? Whether or not they should banned from office-holding you can agree or disagree on but what is the harm in posting a PM in the voting booth?

[Sirius_]

Lol.

Objecting.

Which amendment do you object to?

[Joseph Cao]

Abstain on WM amendment, preemptive Nay on the other two amendments being proposed. Let's not load the bill down with extraneous functions here.

[West_Midlander]

Abstain on WM amendment, preemptive Nay on the other two amendments being proposed. Let's not load the bill down with extraneous functions here.

Senator Cao,

I personally don't view combatting treason as an "extraneous function" when it comes to combatting treason in the first place? Why should some major participants in favor of maliciously and forcefully undermining the Union go without punishment? Furthermore, I believe the amendment as a whole is a clear violation of the Constitution in Article I, Section 1:

All persons born or naturalized in the Republic of Atlasia, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the Republic of Atlasia and of the Region in which they reside, and shall in all cases be afforded equal protection under the law.

Regardless of personal opinions and the wrong deeds clearly done by Governor YT, I believe we have no choice but to leave this to the Supreme Court. With that being said, I would vote for the Amendment if my second amendment were passed but I expect the Amendment to come under scrutiny regardless, at the Court.

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

I am proposing what should hopefully be the final text that we'll pass. The Weatherboy proposal would be intended as a safeguard for future names being added by a bare supermajority while the latter would ensure that the current criminal proceedings against Young Texan won't be dismissed as a result of passage of this amendment.

An Amendment to the Fifth Constitution of Atlasia
To truly preserve the stability, integrity, and democratic nature of the Republic by excluding the disruptive force to the very foundation of Atlasia itself

Section 1. Title

This shall be known as the Domestic Tranquility Amendment for Atlasia.

Article I of the Constitution of Atlasia shall be amended as follows:

Section 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the Republic of Atlasia, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, except those explicitly listed on Article I, Section 15, are citizens of the Republic of Atlasia and of the Region in which they reside, and shall in all cases be afforded equal protection under the law.

Section 15.

Although no Bill of attainder may be passed by either the Senate or the Regions, this Constitution reserves the exceptional right to exclude individuals from citizenship in the Republic of Atlasia, in order to preserve the stability, integrity, and democratic nature of the Republic.

The following individuals under their current or future username or verified sock accounts of the listed individuals, are hereby listed as excluded from such rights in perpetuity and shall not be permitted to hold any office, elected or appointed, or vote in any election, in any region or any other entity under jurisdiction of this Constitution:

-TexasConservative, also known as Young Texan, until January 1, 2028.

Any individuals added to this list must be have the affirmative approval by a seven ninths vote of the entire Senate.

Individuals listed here may be tried and sentenced in absentia for crimes committed against Atlasia in courts of law.

Article VIII of the Constitution of Atlasia shall be amended as follows:

Section 2. Supremacy of the Atlas Forum.
1. Actions taken by Administrators or Moderators of the Atlas Forum are separate and distinct from their actions as citizens of Atlasia and they shall not be restricted, nor obstructed by Atlasian constitutional or statutory provision, in their enforcement of the Terms of Service by Atlasian constitutional or statutory provision.
2. Nothing in this section shall be construed as to provide immunity to moderators who violate any
statutory provision that does not conflict with or obstruct enforcement of the terms of service.
3. Administrators and Moderators of the Atlas Forum shall be permitted to declare an account to be a sock account for the purpose of compliance with Article I, Section 15.

Amendment Explanation

The addition of Section 15 to Article I establishes a mechanism to ensure that individuals who threaten the very existence of this game we know and love as Atlasia can be banned through the highest legal means there is -- the amending process of the federal Constitution. The addition of the third clause to Article VIII, Section 2 allows the forum moderators and administrators to be able to enforce the banning of users through sock checks as a banned user may make a sock account to go around the game ban.

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

Abstain on WM amendment, preemptive Nay on the other two amendments being proposed. Let's not load the bill down with extraneous functions here.

Senator Cao,

I personally don't view combatting treason as an "extraneous function" when it comes to combatting treason in the first place? Why should some major participants in favor of maliciously and forcefully undermining the Union go without punishment? Furthermore, I believe the amendment as a whole is a clear violation of the Constitution in Article I, Section 1:

All persons born or naturalized in the Republic of Atlasia, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the Republic of Atlasia and of the Region in which they reside, and shall in all cases be afforded equal protection under the law.

Regardless of personal opinions and the wrong deeds clearly done by Governor YT, I believe we have no choice but to leave this to the Supreme Court. With that being said, I would vote for the Amendment if my second amendment were passed but I expect the Amendment to come under scrutiny regardless, at the Court.

I know very well that it's unconstitutional under the current text of the constitution. That's why it's a constitutional amendment.

Anyway, I clearly object to both the Muaddib and WM amendments as it's a bad faith filibuster at this point. Truman and OBD were given two years office-holding bans which they haven't fought maliciously against. Truman allowed for a peaceful and democratic transition of power and didn't continue to threaten his political allies to continue doing his bidding after he logged off for the last time nor did he threaten the mods with lawsuits that would actually f**king end this game and forum. The time to try any of Truman, OBD, and Western Democrat was in April and May of 2022. So I really don't see why they should have a comparable punishment to YT. This isn't about being a partisan hack, but it's about doing what's right to save the nation.

[West_Midlander]

Abstain on WM amendment, preemptive Nay on the other two amendments being proposed. Let's not load the bill down with extraneous functions here.

Senator Cao,

I personally don't view combatting treason as an "extraneous function" when it comes to combatting treason in the first place? Why should some major participants in favor of maliciously and forcefully undermining the Union go without punishment? Furthermore, I believe the amendment as a whole is a clear violation of the Constitution in Article I, Section 1:

All persons born or naturalized in the Republic of Atlasia, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the Republic of Atlasia and of the Region in which they reside, and shall in all cases be afforded equal protection under the law.

Regardless of personal opinions and the wrong deeds clearly done by Governor YT, I believe we have no choice but to leave this to the Supreme Court. With that being said, I would vote for the Amendment if my second amendment were passed but I expect the Amendment to come under scrutiny regardless, at the Court.

I know very well that it's unconstitutional under the current text of the constitution. That's why it's a constitutional amendment.

Anyway, I clearly object to both the Muaddib and WM amendments as it's a bad faith filibuster at this point. Truman and OBD were given two years office-holding bans which they haven't fought maliciously against. Truman allowed for a peaceful and democratic transition of power and didn't continue to threaten his political allies to continue doing his bidding after he logged off for the last time nor did he threaten the mods with lawsuits that would actually f**king end this game and forum. The time to try any of Truman, OBD, and Western Democrat was in April and May of 2022. So I really don't see why they should have a comparable punishment to YT. This isn't about being a partisan hack, but it's about doing what's right to save the nation.

I would vote for the Amendment if either of my amendments passed so I don't appreciate you lying about me in saying that I am "bad-faith filibuster[ing]." I guess I expected better from you but apparently, my trust was misplaced.

Furthermore, a constitutional amendment that also violates the Constitution is not necessarily constitutional.

An unconstitutional constitutional amendment is a concept in judicial review based on the idea that even a properly passed and properly ratified constitutional amendment, specifically one that is not explicitly prohibited by a constitution's text, can nevertheless be unconstitutional on substantive (as opposed to procedural) grounds—such as due to this amendment conflicting with some constitutional or even extra-constitutional norm, value, and/or principle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconstitutional_constitutional_amendment

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

Abstain on WM amendment, preemptive Nay on the other two amendments being proposed. Let's not load the bill down with extraneous functions here.

Senator Cao,

I personally don't view combatting treason as an "extraneous function" when it comes to combatting treason in the first place? Why should some major participants in favor of maliciously and forcefully undermining the Union go without punishment? Furthermore, I believe the amendment as a whole is a clear violation of the Constitution in Article I, Section 1:

All persons born or naturalized in the Republic of Atlasia, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the Republic of Atlasia and of the Region in which they reside, and shall in all cases be afforded equal protection under the law.

Regardless of personal opinions and the wrong deeds clearly done by Governor YT, I believe we have no choice but to leave this to the Supreme Court. With that being said, I would vote for the Amendment if my second amendment were passed but I expect the Amendment to come under scrutiny regardless, at the Court.

I know very well that it's unconstitutional under the current text of the constitution. That's why it's a constitutional amendment.

Anyway, I clearly object to both the Muaddib and WM amendments as it's a bad faith filibuster at this point. Truman and OBD were given two years office-holding bans which they haven't fought maliciously against. Truman allowed for a peaceful and democratic transition of power and didn't continue to threaten his political allies to continue doing his bidding after he logged off for the last time nor did he threaten the mods with lawsuits that would actually f**king end this game and forum. The time to try any of Truman, OBD, and Western Democrat was in April and May of 2022. So I really don't see why they should have a comparable punishment to YT. This isn't about being a partisan hack, but it's about doing what's right to save the nation.

I would vote for the Amendment if either of my amendments passed so I don't appreciate you lying about me in saying that I am "bad-faith filibuster[ing]." I guess I expected better from you but apparently, my trust was misplaced.

Furthermore, a constitutional amendment that also violates the Constitution is not necessarily constitutional.

An unconstitutional constitutional amendment is a concept in judicial review based on the idea that even a properly passed and properly ratified constitutional amendment, specifically one that is not explicitly prohibited by a constitution's text, can nevertheless be unconstitutional on substantive (as opposed to procedural) grounds—such as due to this amendment conflicting with some constitutional or even extra-constitutional norm, value, and/or principle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconstitutional_constitutional_amendment

I guess I don't know about your exact intent here, but it does seem like the goal was delay and potentially poison pill this amendment whether or not you fully knew the extent of it as you seemed to just introduce one more amendment with similar wording after the SNP Senator, Muaddib, introduced his own.

This is just a legal theory that has never had a history of being applied in either US or Atlasian law. I suppose this would be the next plan of attack from YT and his blunt tool, Reagente, in order to try and stop the ratification of this amendment. Assuming the Supreme Court somehow decides to give in to their demands, the passage of a Sixth Constitution of Atlasia would be sufficient to ensure the domestic tranquility of the nation.

I guess if anything, we would need to add Reagente to the list as well to secure domestic tranquility.

[West_Midlander]

Do you want to add reagente, as the fifth name, in the interest of consistent punishment for treason?

[WD]

Lol.

Objecting.

Which amendment do you object to?

WM’s

[Sirius_]

A vote is now open on the WM amendment

[Sirius_]

Nay

[West_Midlander]

Nay

Aye.

Why do you believe treason should have no punishment for some? Is there a statute of limitations for treason?

[West_Midlander]

To clarify, I am not seeking to amend this further regardless of whether or not my amendment is adopted, nor do I plan to object to cloture, despite the spurious accusations made by my long-time supposed ally, Senator LT, who chose to attack me because I dared to stray from his preferred position. Genuine constructive criticism is welcome but lies, especially among supposed friends, is not.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Abstain

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

To clarify, I am not seeking to amend this further regardless of whether or not my amendment is adopted, nor do I plan to object to cloture, despite the spurious accusations made by my long-time supposed ally, Senator LT, who chose to attack me because I dared to stray from his preferred position. Genuine constructive criticism is welcome but lies, especially among supposed friends, is not.

I apologize for my paranoid accusations towards you this morning. I misjudged your intent and think we should have a fair and honest debate on the merits of this major amendment being considered here. I think we should have votes on each of the additional individuals separately at least in terms of amending this amendment, and I'll abstain on them and let the rest of the Senate decide.