Lawsuit

[Јas]

I'm fairly certain that you would only become acting President if you are re-elected PPT, but the PPT election won't happen immediately. Until a new PPT is elected (or you are re-elected), it is my understanding that the Dean of the Senate, Bacon King, is to become acting President once bgwah leaves office tomorrow.

I may be completely wrong though (and sorry to the justices for being off topic in the court room).

That's my understanding as well.

Mmm...not so simple.

There is legislation on the line of succession. Note however that it is unconstitutional insofar as it doesn't place the PPT 3rd after the VP (due to what seems to be a drafting error on my part ). Whether that means in is inoperable totally or just insofar as the PPT must be replaced in 3rd...I don't know.

--

IIRC, posting PM's are against forum rules regardless of what a fantasyland court says.

I've tried to get clarification on this before, but though it obviously does seem to violate forum mores, I've not been ble to find this actually stated anywhere officially.

[Sam Spade]

Folks, we are discussing it at the moment, but given the confusion we're going to give a short summary order as to Presidential status.

Until that happens, Jesus (bgwah) remains President and ignore Keystone Phil.

[MasterJedi]

Folks, we are discussing it at the moment, but given the confusion we're going to give a short summary order as to Presidential status.

Until that happens, Jesus (bgwah) remains President and ignore Keystone Phil.

Don't worry. I'm dealing with the trolling.

[Keystone Phil]

Continue to delete my posts, Jedi, but I'm not trolling. A former Attorney General and Chief Justice told me that I'm legally the President.

[MasterJedi]

Continue to delete my posts, Jedi, but I'm not trolling. A former Attorney General and Chief Justice told me that I'm legally the President.

Nobody cares.  Court ruled and Peter isn't right anyways. Bgwah stays President but doesn't have a cabinet.

[Keystone Phil]

Continue to delete my posts, Jedi, but I'm not trolling. A former Attorney General and Chief Justice told me that I'm legally the President.

Nobody cares.  Court ruled and Peter isn't right anyways. Bgwah stays President but doesn't have a cabinet.

And the Court will likely be sued.

[Sam Spade]

Look, folks, we're 30 minutes into a new term.  Relax.

[Barnes]

It's kind of like real life Honduras!

[Peter]

Continue to delete my posts, Jedi, but I'm not trolling. A former Attorney General and Chief Justice told me that I'm legally the President.

Nobody cares.  Court ruled and Peter isn't right anyways. Bgwah stays President but doesn't have a cabinet.

There is a strong line of precedent from this very Court that says the Cabinet do stay in office regardless of the status of President (see Jas v. Peter).

I would remind you that you are talking to the Father of the Constitution, so tread carefully before you challenge my opinions.

[Sam Spade]

Much appreciated

I think it's obvious from my maps as to whether or not I will count Gustaf's vote. I was hoping someone would catch that

Each of the other instances had witness accounts or evidence that there were technical errors (such as the vote appearing on the profile posts but not in the actual thread) but there were no such documented evidence or witness accounts for Gustaf. We're essentially taking his word for it, and in the close nature of this election, that would be unwise.

Listen, I don't want to play the bad guy here, and I wouldn't be offended if you all take this to court. It's best to get some precedent on this issue.

[bullmoose88]

We're working on a draft, if all goes well, hope to have it up by tonight.  Sorry for the delay.

[Purple State]

We're working on a draft, if all goes well, hope to have it up by tonight.  Sorry for the delay.

Dastardly sabbath! So a ton of stuff is going to go down tonight and tomorrow and I won't find out until tomorrow. Hogwash!

(Gotta keep the language clean for the court, right?)

[Sam Spade]

Decision should be handed down this evening, folks.  If not then, definitely tomorrow.

[bullmoose88]

Oyez Oyez

A ruling will be forthcoming shortly (just editing it, not very long). 

[/s]Ray S. Judicata

[bullmoose88]

The Chief Justice delivered the unanimous opinion of the Court.

I.  THE PLAINTIFF DID NOT PROVE THAT THE SECRETARY OF FORUM AFFAIRS WAS ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS IN HIS DECISION TO COUNT THE VOTE OF MAROKAI BLUE.

Plaintiff has failed to prove that the "vote" in question (Marokai's alleged absentee vote) existed.  In overturning an agency determination, such as that of the SoFA, the plaintiff must show by clear and convincing evidence that the agency was arbitrary and capricious in its determination.  Here, Plaintiff has only demonstrated that a vote possibly existed in the absentee booth.  At best, he has proved a possible internet goblin spoiled a citizen's ballot.  Assuming Plaintiff could have proven a valid absentee vote, Marokai Blue, in our opinion, merely voted again in a good faith belief that his last vote disappeared.  We think that no other reasonable fact finder could find otherwise.

We believe that the intent of the voting act was to prevent/remedy dirty dealing in the elections process, not to disenfranchise voters who may have voted again in the honest belief their vote was lost.  Regardless of our opinion about the true intent of the act, Plaintiff has failed to meet his burden of proving a violation actually took place and that the SoFA was arbitrary and capricious in his tabulation of the vote.

II. PLAINTIFF’S CHALLENGE IN THE ALTERNATIVE FAILS FOR LACK OF NOTICE PROVIDED TO RESPONDENT.

Plaintiff PiT's appeal in front of this Court placed the single issue of the validity of Marokai's vote for our examination.  However, in his brief, PiT also brought the validity of Gustaf's vote.  Since this is not a proper method of bringing a court challenge to a vote in an election before this court, we deny his challenge of Gustaf's vote.  With some as yet undefined exceptions, a challenge to a vote (or votes) in an election must be brought in the original complaint or in a judicially-approved amendment to said complaint, not the appellate brief because of the lack of notice that it provides respondent.  While the court may encourage the Plaintiff to clarify what is already written in his or her brief, it cannot do the Plaintiff’s job for him or her.  It cannot create an argument that the Plaintiff neglected from his/her complaint nor can it provide the respondent with notice.  These are the Plaintiff’s tasks alone.


Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the Secretary of Forum Affairs, lift any and all injunctions against the certification of the election of President of Atlasia, and Vice President of Atlasia, and the duly certified winners of the election may take their offices forthwith.

So Ordered.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Understood.

[Lief 🗽]

Thank you, your Honors. I'll swear in as soon as possible.

[Sam Spade]

I want to write a short concurrence on this matter:
I agree with the entirety of this decision in full.  Moreover, I agree with the full allowance of Marokai Blue's vote under CESRA.

However, I believe the choice made by the SoFA concerning the votes of Gustaf was plainly incorrect and contrary to applicable law. 

I can not find any reasonable ground to disallow Gustaf's vote and allow the votes of Andy Jackson and Bacon King that would ensure that all parties were equally protected under law.  The votes were cast under almost similar circumstances and require taking the word of all parties at face value concerning their truthfulness.  While I do believe that the SoFA should have the right to count votes that may technically fall outside the strictures of the law under emergency circumstances, his choices may not be made such as to violate the guarantees of equal protection and due process guaranteed by our Constitution.

Nevertheless, in order to make such a choice, this court would have to overturn an election, and just as importantly, determine the law concerning a vote that had not been raised properly, if raised at all.  That is a decision that this court would not think of entertaining absolute the strongest rationale and the most circumspect attention to the law.

As such, I concur with the Chief Justice in full agreement.

Justice Sam Spade

[Hatman 🍁]

Barnes registered within 7 days of the earliest possible start of the election. That was the problem. It had nothing to do with when he attained 25 posts. That's why his vote was disallowed.

[Sam Spade]

Barnes registered within 7 days of the earliest possible start of the election. That was the problem. It had nothing to do with when he attained 25 posts. That's why his vote was disallowed.

You're right.  This has obviously not been my day, even though at least we were able to get this decision off the table.  I'm removing that part of the concurrence.

[afleitch]

Thank you Justices.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Thank you Justices.

Indeed. I much appreciate my vote actually counting.

[opebo]

Justice opebo joins in the decision published above.