Talk Elections

Atlas Fantasy Elections => Atlas Fantasy Government => Topic started by: Fuzzybigfoot on June 19, 2012, 08:20:14 PM



Title: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: Fuzzybigfoot on June 19, 2012, 08:20:14 PM
The Office of the Attorney General is officially charging the Imperial South with:


"Breaking Second Clause of Section 7, Article 1 of Atlasia's third constitution by creating a regional curency (the "Dibble") under the Second Section of the Trojan Act."  




Let it begin.  


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. the Southeast
Post by: Fuzzybigfoot on June 19, 2012, 09:00:04 PM
The alleged violation, the second section of the Trojan Act:
 
Quote
 
The Government of the IDS shall accept the "Dibble" (gold and silver coins in 1,2,5,10,25,50,100,& 500 Dibble denominations that are produced and distributed by a private company) as payment for and service or debts owed to the region.


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. the Southeast III
Post by: Ebowed on June 20, 2012, 03:09:25 AM
Official Atlasia Supreme Court Release
Nyman, DC

Writ of Certiorari
The Atlasian Supreme Court grants certiorari to hear this question of whether the Trojan Act violates Section 7, Article 1 of the Constitution.

Schedule
Petitioner has seventy-two hours to file his brief.  It is expected no later than 4:00AM EDT on Saturday, June 23, 2012.

Respondent has an additional forty-eight hours to file his brief.  It is expected no later than 4:00AM EDT on Monday, June 25, 2012.

Amicus Briefs will be accepted until 4:00AM EDT on Monday, June 25, 2012, unless the filing party can show sufficient need.

Additional time may be granted to either party upon a showing of sufficient need.

A possible period of argument (Q&A) may be scheduled after presentation of the briefs in case any member of the Court has any questions for the parties.


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. the Southeast III
Post by: CatoMinor on June 20, 2012, 12:53:49 PM
Members of the court and Attorney General, I ask that the case be re-named Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South.

Please and thanks :)


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. the Southeast III
Post by: Fuzzybigfoot on June 20, 2012, 06:20:15 PM
Members of the court and Attorney General, I ask that the case be re-named Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South.

Please and thanks :)

Done.  :)


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: Fuzzybigfoot on June 22, 2012, 10:40:07 PM
        Ladies and gents, the IDS would like you to believe that the Dibble is not a currency, but infact a separate unit of barter.  This, however, is not the case in reality.  The IDS has been distributing Dibbles for months, in exchange for regular Atlasian dollars.  They've even allowed third parties to pay for government services in Dibbles instead of Atlasian dollars.  Thus, they give their own Dibbles value, which, again, are used in the private sector.  This means that the Dibble becomes representational of the South's economy, kind of like how the Atlasian currency represents the country's economy as a whole. 

         My counterpart, though respectable  ;), may argue that since the Dibble wasn't manufactured by the IDS government itself, and thus the South isn't responsible for whatever affect it has on whatever.   However, you must take into account that the South ordered for these Dibbles to be created and distributed, which means that the previous argument is mute.

         Your honors, you only need to look at the basics to see that the Dibble is obviously a currency.  I would like yield the floor to my friend Jbrase, and later a Q and A if that is possible please.  :)  Thank you. 


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: CatoMinor on June 23, 2012, 02:58:53 AM
*expect the victim's respondent's Brief sometime this evening*


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: CatoMinor on June 24, 2012, 12:00:59 AM
Friends, Atlasians, Court members, lend me your ears.
I come to defend a law, not to praise it.

For the Honorable Justices, here (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Trojan_Act) is the bill in its entirety

The Imperial Dominion of the South is accused of being in violation of the following in the Atlasian Constitution
Quote from: Article I Section 7.2
No Region may issue Coin or Currency or make any Coin or Currency other than that of the Republic of Atlasia a legal tender.

This clause makes it clear as day that two freedoms are denied to the regions:
1. The right to create coin or currency
2. The authority to declare said coin or currency as legal tender.

The IDS would like to make it clear, so that there is no doubt whatsoever, that whether we like it or not we recognize that the above is law and we follow the law.

Now lets look at the first of two areas we are alleged to be in violation of. That no region may issue coin or currency. Our region does not issue the "Dibble", a private business mints the gold and silver coins and it is 100% their choice that they do with them. we simply accept it if that is how citizens choose pay us and so that we may get some revenue out of it we allow people to buy dibbles from the IDS at any of the capitol buildings throughout the region. In short, we do not issue the dibbles, we simply sell what we do have (that we did not produce) in the same manner any government would and can sell any property.

The Honorable General Fuzz claims the IDS "ordered the dibble to be created and distributed". As my above argument points out and as our bill clearly states, we ordered nothing to be created and we forced no person to take them.

Now I shall address the second area that we could possibly be in violation of. That no region make make coin or currency legal tender other than the Atlasian Dollar. To be legal tender it must be something that is offered as payment of debt that, and this is key, must be accepted by creditors. Bingo, right there. Must. Be. Accepted. Not one person, not one business, not one entity on Nym90's green Earth is forced by law to accept dibbles as payment for debt or as money. Not even the IDS Government has to accept them, we can still refuse them and demand real Atlasian money. Dibbles may be nice looking and shinny, but they are by no means legal tender.

The Honorable Fuzz's case rests soulfully on his claim that the IDS ordered the dibbles and we distribute them. I have proven that the IDS in fact has never ordered the dibbles, and that our alleged distribution is nothing more than selling government property which is perfectly legal. I have proven the allegations against the IDS are false, and no part of the clause in question has been violated.

I ask that the court find the IDS innocent.


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: CatoMinor on June 24, 2012, 12:01:39 AM
I now welcome any questions from the Honorable Justices.


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: Fuzzybigfoot on June 24, 2012, 12:48:49 AM
I now welcome any questions from the Honorable Justices.

As do I.  :)


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: Ebowed on June 24, 2012, 05:47:37 AM
I now welcome any questions from the Honorable Justices.

In Section 2 of the Trojan Act, what is the purpose of stipulating the denominations of the 'Dibble'?


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: CatoMinor on June 24, 2012, 11:30:55 AM
I now welcome any questions from the Honorable Justices.

In Section 2 of the Trojan Act, what is the purpose of stipulating the denominations of the 'Dibble'?
I made that section in parentheses when I wrote the bill because that is explaining what dibbles are not what they have to be.


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: Ebowed on June 24, 2012, 06:20:34 PM
I made that section in parentheses when I wrote the bill because that is explaining what dibbles are not what they have to be.

Was there a previous reference to the 'Dibble' amongst IDS citizenry specifically outlining these denominations?

I'm also curious about Section 2b.  Would you be able to provide a rough estimate of the cost, in Atlasian dollars, to the IDS budget of the provision allowing for the exchanging of Atlasian currency for the privately minted 'Dibble'?  If the 'Dibble' is not officially recognised currency by the IDS government, would this amount to the government handing out money at a loss?  Why would these exchanges be performed at IDS capitol buildings?  What is the exchange rate?


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on June 24, 2012, 06:57:51 PM
()


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: bgwah on June 24, 2012, 07:19:26 PM
However, you must take into account that the South ordered for these Dibbles to be created and distributed, which means that the previous argument is mute.

Do you have a link to support this claim?


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: CatoMinor on June 24, 2012, 07:27:59 PM
The locations are at the capitol buildings because, well, why not? If one had a brand new nice car it would make sense that they would feel safest placing it in their own garage. The exchange rate is whatever gold and silver currently trade for and we go from there. It should not be considered a loss as the value of gold and silver go up and down (mostly up) so when we sell it it can very well be for more than it was worth when we acquired it.

As for the exact effect on our budget I'd need to talk to a few people to find out.


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: Fuzzybigfoot on June 24, 2012, 07:53:58 PM
However, you must take into account that the South ordered for these Dibbles to be created and distributed, which means that the previous argument is mute.

Do you have a link to support this claim?


Quote
The Government of the IDS shall accept the "Dibble" (gold and silver coins in 1,2,5,10,25,50,100,& 500 Dibble denominations that are produced and distributed by a private company) as payment for and service or debts owed to the region.


Although the bill says that the Dibbles are distributed by a private company, they are also exchanged at the capitol buildings in the IDS, which is also a way of distribution.  On terms of creation, the Dibble did not exist until this bill was signed into law.  Therefore, demand for the Dibble must have come from the IDS itself.  


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: Ebowed on June 24, 2012, 08:36:43 PM
The locations are at the capitol buildings because, well, why not? If one had a brand new nice car it would make sense that they would feel safest placing it in their own garage.

So, in effect, exchange of the 'Dibble' is a service provided by the IDS government?


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: CatoMinor on June 24, 2012, 08:40:53 PM

Although the bill says that the Dibbles are distributed by a private company, they are also exchanged at the capitol buildings in the IDS, which is also a way of distribution.  On terms of creation, the Dibble did not exist until this bill was signed into law.  Therefore, demand for the Dibble must have come from the IDS itself.  

Surely the IDS accepting and selling dibbles affects demand, but that has nothing to do with us allegedly ordering them. Creating an environment in which they grow in demand =/= placing an order.


So, in effect, exchange of the 'Dibble' is a service provided by the IDS government?

Only if you would count a local police auction as a Government Service. Ours sales may be a government action taken on our part, but not really in the same category as paving roads or fighting fires.


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: bgwah on June 25, 2012, 12:37:04 AM
However, you must take into account that the South ordered for these Dibbles to be created and distributed, which means that the previous argument is mute.

Do you have a link to support this claim?


Quote
The Government of the IDS shall accept the "Dibble" (gold and silver coins in 1,2,5,10,25,50,100,& 500 Dibble denominations that are produced and distributed by a private company) as payment for and service or debts owed to the region.


Although the bill says that the Dibbles are distributed by a private company, they are also exchanged at the capitol buildings in the IDS, which is also a way of distribution.  On terms of creation, the Dibble did not exist until this bill was signed into law.  Therefore, demand for the Dibble must have come from the IDS itself. 

So prior to that law, the currency did not exist?


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: Fuzzybigfoot on June 25, 2012, 12:39:14 AM
However, you must take into account that the South ordered for these Dibbles to be created and distributed, which means that the previous argument is mute.

Do you have a link to support this claim?


Quote
The Government of the IDS shall accept the "Dibble" (gold and silver coins in 1,2,5,10,25,50,100,& 500 Dibble denominations that are produced and distributed by a private company) as payment for and service or debts owed to the region.


Although the bill says that the Dibbles are distributed by a private company, they are also exchanged at the capitol buildings in the IDS, which is also a way of distribution.  On terms of creation, the Dibble did not exist until this bill was signed into law.  Therefore, demand for the Dibble must have come from the IDS itself. 

So prior to that law, the currency did not exist?

It appears it did not, unless someone can prove otherwise.


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: CatoMinor on June 25, 2012, 12:53:45 AM
Burden of proof is on the accuser, proof it didn't exist before :P

Just because we decided to accept the dibbles from the time the law was passed, that doesn't mean the people who make them didn't produce them on a smaller scale before.


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: Fuzzybigfoot on June 25, 2012, 01:15:16 AM
Burden of proof is on the accuser, proof it didn't exist before :P

Just because we decided to accept the dibbles from the time the law was passed, that doesn't mean the people who make them didn't produce them on a smaller scale before.

Well there isn't anything to prove it existed before, so....


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: Ebowed on June 25, 2012, 06:04:29 AM
Ours sales may be a government action taken on our part, but not really in the same category as paving roads or fighting fires.

Why not?  According to your own analogy, it is 'safest placing' the Dibbles at IDS capitol buildings.  If one purchases a 'brand new' automobile and stores it in 'their own garage', they are storing it there to signify their own ownership of said automobile, are they not?  Are the items sold at police auctions not originally purchased through public directive?


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: opebo on June 25, 2012, 06:20:40 AM
...To be legal tender it must be something that is offered as payment of debt that, and this is key, must be accepted by creditors. Bingo, right there. Must. Be. Accepted. Not one person, not one business, not one entity on Nym90's green Earth is forced by law to accept dibbles as payment for debt or as money. Not even the IDS Government has to accept them, we can still refuse them and demand real Atlasian money.

I would like to know if there are any departments or local divisions of the IDS government which do in fact refuse to accept 'The Dibble' as payment?  If there were this would certainly belie the impression that it is IDS policy to establish 'The Dibble' as a currency. 


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: bgwah on June 25, 2012, 07:11:16 AM
Burden of proof is on the accuser, proof it didn't exist before :P

Just because we decided to accept the dibbles from the time the law was passed, that doesn't mean the people who make them didn't produce them on a smaller scale before.

A quick forum search suggests it didn't, so I'll have to assume it did not unless you have proof otherwise.


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: CatoMinor on June 25, 2012, 11:47:02 AM
A quick forum search suggests it didn't, so I'll have to assume it did not unless you have proof otherwise.

That is rather difficult to proof becuase as far as Atlasia is concerned its impossible to prove any business exists. If we go by a standard of something only exists becuase it is mentioned by a GM or in some other part of Atlasia that would mean that millions of business, as far as Atlasia is concerned, would no longer exist. I doubt you will find any mention of Whole Foods Market here, does that mean it does not exist?


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: Ebowed on June 25, 2012, 11:57:05 AM
That is rather difficult to proof becuase as far as Atlasia is concerned its impossible to prove any business exists. If we go by a standard of something only exists becuase it is mentioned by a GM or in some other part of Atlasia that would mean that millions of business, as far as Atlasia is concerned, would no longer exist.

If there is no previous reference to the 'Dibble' anywhere until legislation is crafted naming its denominations and the locations where it may be obtained, why should we feel confident that it existed prior to its origins within the Trojan Act?


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 25, 2012, 01:30:42 PM
We went through with this bill? I thought it failed?


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: Fuzzybigfoot on June 25, 2012, 03:23:37 PM
...To be legal tender it must be something that is offered as payment of debt that, and this is key, must be accepted by creditors. Bingo, right there. Must. Be. Accepted. Not one person, not one business, not one entity on Nym90's green Earth is forced by law to accept dibbles as payment for debt or as money. Not even the IDS Government has to accept them, we can still refuse them and demand real Atlasian money.

I would like to know if there are any departments or local divisions of the IDS government which do in fact refuse to accept 'The Dibble' as payment?  If there were this would certainly belie the impression that it is IDS policy to establish 'The Dibble' as a currency. 


Here's a quote from section 2, clause A:

Quote
a. The IDS shall not by any means force any private business or individuals to accept the Dibble in private barter.



As you can see, they only said that individuals and private businesses could refuse to accept Dibbles.  They never said that the regional government could too. 


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: CatoMinor on June 25, 2012, 04:44:22 PM
...To be legal tender it must be something that is offered as payment of debt that, and this is key, must be accepted by creditors. Bingo, right there. Must. Be. Accepted. Not one person, not one business, not one entity on Nym90's green Earth is forced by law to accept dibbles as payment for debt or as money. Not even the IDS Government has to accept them, we can still refuse them and demand real Atlasian money.

I would like to know if there are any departments or local divisions of the IDS government which do in fact refuse to accept 'The Dibble' as payment?  If there were this would certainly belie the impression that it is IDS policy to establish 'The Dibble' as a currency. 

The departments and divisions you speak of are non-player ran so in this case you will have to look to region level policy. As the person who wrote the bill I can tell you the intent is that the IDS was to officially begin accepting dibbles, not that we have to them, but the option is there. If any municipalities or what have you decided they do not accept dibbles then we would have no issue with that, the choice is theirs.


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: Torie on June 25, 2012, 05:11:09 PM
What is the difference between the government accepting as something of value these little trinkets called dribbles, and the government accepting Gray Goose Vodka in lieu of currency?  As noted, the key difference is whether or not the government refuses to accept Atlasian currency as payment for its debts. It does so accept such currency. The exclusive right to create a currency which must be accepted in payment of debts, does not in my world suggest an intention, or grant a right, to preclude barter transactions, even ones involving a subsidiary provincial arm of government. Now granted, the IDS government is a dumb, because it may find out that third parties don't consider the dribble toys as valuable as it does. And it must accept them from everyone, or you have an equal protection issue. So it looks like IDS is headed for bankruptcy. Maybe it would be wise ala the Euro and Greece, for Atlasia to deny the use of its currency in IDS - just kick them out of the Atlasian currency union.

One notes however that these dribble toys are made of a precious metal, so just like the value of vodka, they will fluctuate in value, meaning that IDS government will be in the business of changing its dribble price list on a daily, and maybe even hourly, basis. Good luck with that. That is the problem with toys, they come in and out of fashion.

I think I am now being escorted out of the courtroom by the bailiff.


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: Ebowed on June 25, 2012, 06:05:25 PM
We'll allow another 24 hours for any remaining statements on behalf of interested parties, as well as the opportunity for participants to answer any questions, before going to work on our decision.


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: Fuzzybigfoot on June 25, 2012, 08:04:24 PM
must be accepted by creditors. Bingo, right there. Must. Be. Accepted. Not one person, not one business, not one entity on Nym90's green Earth is forced by law to accept dibbles as payment for debt or as money.

A currency doesn't have to be generally accepted by all creditors, though. There are many creditors in Canada, England, Germany, France, Spain, and Russia.  Do they have to accept our cash?  Those who trade with the currency define it.  If a currency was something that would have to be broadly accepted by everyone and everything (like you imply), we would only have one in the world.  And we don't.  The people in the south who accept the Dibble as payment define its economic strength.  Therefore, it functions as a currency to the parties that use it, including your regional government. 

And since when were people forced to accept money as payment?  It would be unwise not to use regular money, but it's not illegal.  Someone could simply accept chessnuts as payment, if they wanted to.  You keep trying to debunk this charge by implying that a currency has to be be accepted, therefore exempting your Dibble (which doesn't have to be accepted by anyone, supposedly) from being defined as a medium of exchange.  But I stress again, that doesn't matter, because a currency obviously doesn't have to be taken by everyone.   

Not even the IDS Government has to accept them, we can still refuse them and demand real Atlasian money.

Again, the bill only exempted private citizens and businesses from "having" to accept the Dibble.  It never said anything about the regional government.


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on June 26, 2012, 12:10:31 AM
If it is not illegal to accept "chessnuts" as payment, why should it be illegal to accept the privately produced Dibble?

I know it sounds like a throwaway concept, but I really think this case is as simple as that.

(If my input is not acceptable, I'll retract my statement--I'm not totally familiar with Supreme Court etiquette yet. :))


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: Fuzzybigfoot on June 26, 2012, 06:34:22 PM
If it is not illegal to accept "chessnuts" as payment, why should it be illegal to accept the privately produced Dibble?

Well we're making the case that it isn't privately produced.  ;)


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: CatoMinor on June 26, 2012, 06:51:17 PM
If it is not illegal to accept "chessnuts" as payment, why should it be illegal to accept the privately produced Dibble?

Well we're making the case that it isn't privately produced.  ;)

Then I guess the very definition of the word "private" (in terms of public vs private) is at stake here. :P


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: Fuzzybigfoot on June 26, 2012, 07:16:35 PM
If it is not illegal to accept "chessnuts" as payment, why should it be illegal to accept the privately produced Dibble?

Well we're making the case that it isn't privately produced.  ;)

Then I guess the very definition of the word "private" (in terms of public vs private) is at stake here. :P

Even though a private company manufactured them, you ordered for them to make the Dibbles.  So they were, in fact, created by you.  :P


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: Ebowed on June 26, 2012, 10:55:09 PM
Thank you gentlemen, we hope to have a decision ready within the next day.


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: CatoMinor on June 26, 2012, 11:01:27 PM
Closing statements, written by Jbrase and Al Pacino

        You honors and people of Atlasia, as you are all well aware, I am Jbrase the defense attorney for the IDS. Now that man over there, he is the prosecuting Attorney General, and he couldn't be happier today. He is a happy man today, because today he is going after a Region. And if he gets us, if he gets us he will be a star. He's gonna have his name plastered in this months Law Review, center fold, "Lawyer of the month." Now in order to win this case, he needs you, naturally, the justice. So he is counting on tapping that emotion in you that says "Oh, what did the south do this time?. However these proceedings are not about that. These proceedings are here to ensure that justice is done. Justice is as any reasonable man would tell you, the finding of the truth. What is the truth today?

       One truth, a tragic one, is that our region was held up at gunpoint by agents of the Attorney General. Another truth is that the prosecution hasn't any proof to back its claims. Not one piece of substantiating evidence other than his own allegations. Another truth is, that the IDS has not itself nor any branch of it ever produce, nor order a single Dibble. But lets get back to justice.What is the intention of Justice? The intention of Justice is to see that the guilty are proven guilty and the innocent are set free.  Simple isn't it? Only it is not that simple.

      It is the defense's duty to protect the rights of those accused, as it is the prosecutions duty to uphold and defend the laws of the state. Justice for all. Only we have a problem here.  Know what it is? Both sides want to win. We want to win regardless of the truth, and regardless of justice, regardless of who's guilty or innocent. Winning is everything. That man there wants to win so badly today, means so much to him, he is so carried away with the prospect of winning, the idea of it, that he forgot something. That which is absolutely essential to today's proceedings. He forgot his case. He forgot to bring it. I don't know, I don't see it, do you? The prosecutions case, he's got to have one. No evidence to back up accusations at all, nothing but his own claims.

     The IDS on the other hand, your honors, has presented a case to end all cases. We have the text of the law itself, and to ensure its meanings are not mis-understood, the actual author of the law to explain it. That, your honors and the people of Atlasia, is what this all boils down to. We can back up our claims, the honorable Fuzz cannot.

I ask you now to do what is right, and find the IDS innocent.


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: CatoMinor on June 26, 2012, 11:04:09 PM
Thank you gentlemen, we hope to have a decision ready within the next day.
Your honor, while typing out some closing statements, not once but three times were my text deleted. Once because of the power going out, once because I clicked something by mistake, and finally because of some atlas error. I spent a while trying to get it posted, I ask that you take my closing remarks into your consideration.


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: Ebowed on June 27, 2012, 12:07:18 AM
I ask that you take my closing remarks into your consideration.

All of your remarks will be taken into consideration as we formulate our opinion.


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: Fuzzybigfoot on June 27, 2012, 12:37:50 AM
Closing statements by Attorney General Fuzzybigfoot (written by phone):



Ladies and gentlemen,


Despite the honorable Jbrase may say, the Dibble is indeed a currency.  And the IDS must answer for this crime.

Time and time again, the defense has displayed a complete disregard for the law.  Time and time again, they have misrepresented the purpose and intent of their own legislation on this very thread.  The Dibble is indeed theirs; the evidence (which has been provided by, the way) shows that they assigned it wealth, they were responsible for its creation, and I hope, today, the honorable justices will strike it down in the name of justice.

My fellow citizens, please take note of the defense's summary of myself, the prosecution.  They say I am a happy man, they say I will be gloating if the honorable justices accept my case as valid.  I will not be happy, but I will be very relieved that I will be able to look back at my record in a few weeks, knowing that my retirement has been earned.


Thank you.


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: Fuzzybigfoot on June 28, 2012, 03:49:29 AM
lol what Al Pacino movie was that speech from again?


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: Ebowed on June 28, 2012, 07:49:42 AM
Sorry gentlemen, I'm running late, we'll have something ready soon.


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: Fuzzybigfoot on July 02, 2012, 05:31:16 PM
So..... ;)


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: Ebowed on July 04, 2012, 03:11:42 AM
The Chief Justice delivered the opinion of the Court, with the Senior Associate Justice concurring.

Statement of Facts

The Attorney General has brought suit against the government of the Imperial Dominion of the Southeast (IDS), alleging that Section 2 of the Trojan Act is in violation of Article I, Section 7, Clause 2 of the Third Constitution.  The Trojan Act, appropriately named in honour of a common colloquialism to describe an attack by the Greeks on the city of Troy, was passed unanimously by the IDS legislature on July 5, 2011.  Sections 1 and 3 deal with the distribution of condoms in public educational facilities, whilst Section 2 states as follows:

Quote
The Government of the IDS shall accept the "Dibble" (gold and silver coins in 1,2,5,10,25,50,100,& 500 Dibble denominations that are produced and distributed by a private company) as payment for and service or debts owed to the region.

    a. The IDS shall not by any means force any private business or individuals to accept the Dibble in private barter.
    b. If any citizen on the IDS would like to Exchange Dibbles for Dollars or vice versa, they may do at the Capitol Building in Memphis or in the capitols of the states within the IDS.
    c. The IDS does not recognize the Dibble as a "currency", but as simply items to be used in barter.

The relevant clause from the Constitution states:

Quote
No Region may issue Coin or Currency or make any Coin or Currency other than that of the Republic of Atlasia a legal tender.



Ruling

It is the opinion of this Court that Section 2 of the Trojan Act is in clear violation of Article I, Section 7, Clause 2, despite arguments to the contrary on behalf of the IDS government by the bill's sponsor, Mr. Jbrase.  Though the wording of the legislation appears intended to circumvent the Constitutional prohibition of regional minting and distribution of unique currency, the Act nonetheless seeks to create a regional currency.  Outsourcing the duty of minting the 'Dibble' to an unspecified private company is comparable to the diversion of public funds to privately operated prisons: though the government lacks oversight into the conduction of the affair, it nonetheless remains responsible.  Through allowing the exchange of the 'Dibble' into the Atlasian dollar, and vice versa, at IDS capitol buildings, the distribution of the 'Dibble' is a function offered by the IDS government to its citizens in violation of a federal prohibition of such activity.

Noting Section 2c of the Trojan Act stipulates that the 'Dibble' is simply an item to be used in barter, rather than a currency, does not alter the effect of openly exchanging the 'Dibble' for Atlasian dollars, suggesting that its only practical use as an item is, in fact, a currency which is intended to be entirely interchangeable with the Atlasian dollar.  In addition, though the defense claims that the naming of denominations of the 'Dibble' is only meant as a suggestion, rather than a legal requirement, it seems clear to this Court that no prior reference to the 'Dibble' amongst IDS citizenry exists, indicating that Section 2 is the origin of these denominations.

The Court finds the entirety of Section 2 of the Trojan Act to be in violation of Article I, Section 7, Clause 2 and accordingly strikes it down.


Title: Re: Atlasia vs. The Imperial Dominion of the South
Post by: H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY on July 04, 2012, 09:53:23 AM
Well, that's over now.

Fuzzy, I disapprove of you less than I did before! That's a step up!