Inks.LWC v. the Mideast Region (Mideast Superior Court)

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

May it please the court:

I wish to challenge the certifications of the May Mideast election on the grounds that drj101's vote should have been counted as invalid due to campaigning in the voting booth.  drj101's vote called a candidate "boring", which should be found to be considered campaigning against that candidate.  I am prepared to present evidence that a candidate who is seen as "boring" is likely to have some type of change in the number of votes he will receive, due to being seen as boring.

Should the court decide to hear this case, I will present my full brief.

Inks.LWC

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I would like to file an addendum to my brief to respond to the motion to dismiss for lack of standing.

Nowhere in the Mideast Campaining in Voting Booths Statute nor the Constitution does it say anything about a vote having to materially affect the outcome of a race.  One who campaigns in a voting booth can be subject to criminal prosecution as well.

Counsel for the defendant has given no evidence that drj101's ballot does not affect the final results of the election.

Furthermore, even if the final results in terms of who was elected will not change, the order of elimination would change (at least according to my calculations).  In times of a vacancy arising in the Assembly, Governors may look to past election results to see who was a runner-up in an election, and the order of elimination, while not necessarily material in terms of who was elected, may be material in the future if a vacancy has to be filled.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I object to Bacon King representing both the defendant and an amicus curiae.  The interests of the two parties are not the same; the interest of the defendant is to hold a fair election, while the interest of drj101 is (presumably) to get elected (or in the least, to garner votes).  To represent both parties would be a severe conflict of interest.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Where did Bacon King state he is acting as an amicus curiae?

I will represent the defendant.

I request a dismissal of this case for lack of standing, as the inclusion or exclusion of drj's ballot does not affect the final results of the election in any way.

You are not the defendant.  I am suing the Region.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Considering that a new Governor swears in tomorrow, if the defendant wishes to file a brief, it should be done soon. I am unaware of Governor-elect ZuWo's stance on the case (although I did just PM him), but it may not be the same as that of Governor Tmthforu94.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Considering that a new Governor swears in tomorrow, if the defendant wishes to file a brief, it should be done soon. I am unaware of Governor-elect ZuWo's stance on the case (although I did just PM him), but it may not be the same as that of Governor Tmthforu94.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Sorry for the repeat. I didn't think it went through, and I can't delete on $obile

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

If drj101 still wants her vote cast, I would suggest that she file an amicus brief as soon as possible.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

With all due respect to the Court, how can the previous Mideast government be a party to this case?  I did not sue Tmthforu.  I sued the Mideast Government.  The previous Mideast government cannot be sued, because the previous Mideast Government cannot recertify the results.  If the previous Mideast government loses this case and is ordered to recertify its results, it has no power to do so, because that government is no longer in a position to certify the results.  Only Governor ZuWo (or Cathcon as his Lt. Governor in ZuWo's absence) has the power to recertify the results.

I am confused as to what exactly is going on here.  Furthermore, we have no indication that the Mideast Government actually wants Siren to represent it.

If Governor ZuWo wants to designate Siren to argue the position of the previous Government, but on behalf of the current government, that would be a different issue, as then a judgment by this court would be binding on the current administration.

Is that what Siren is asking to do?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I don't understand what's going on.  I am suing the government of the Mideast Region.  The head of that Government is Governor ZuWo.  He is the only party in this case.

If anyone else is represented by an attorney, that party is an amicus curiae.  No governor would recertify the results without a court order, but this court can only order ZuWo to recertify the results; it cannot order Tmthforu to recertify them, because Tmthforu no longer has any power to do anything on behalf of the Mideast government.

This has nothing to do with standing... nobody has brought that up.

But I am confused over who is representing who, and who exactly the court is trying to treat as a party to this case.  This whole case has been a jumbled unclear mess, and I think we should get straight who is a party, and who is not before we're having people filing briefs.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I'm saying that only Governor ZuWo has the authority to appoint someone to represent the Mideast Region, because I am suing (now) Governor ZuWo in his official capacity as head of the executive branch of the region.  It has nothing to do with standing; it has to do with who (or rather what) I am suing, which is the Executive of the Mideast Region (or rather, the region itself).

Now that he's appointed Siren to represent the region, I think we're all set.

What is the deadline for my brief?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Brief from Plaintiff Inks.LWC

Statement of Facts
In the race for Governor, drj101 cast her vote as follows:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[1]

Using Google translate to detect the language used, the language is Russian and translates to the following:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[2]

According to a survey 48.5% of people in a public poll indicated that a candidate being "boring" would have some effect on whether or not they would vote for that candidate, with 9.1% saying they would be more likely to vote for the person and 39.4% saying they would be less likely to vote for the person.[3]

Question Presented
Does labeling candidates "pretty boring" in a vote cast in an official voting booth constitute campaigning in the voting booth?

Argument
As counsel for the defendant has already pointed out in his brief, campaigning in the voting booth is an ongoing problem in Atlasia.  While I disagree with counsel's opinions in sections 1c and 1d of his brief, his analysis is spot on in sections 1a and 1b.  It seems as if counsel for the defendant is arguing that because I have not raised a suit in every other election where campaigning has occurred in the voting booth, that I should not do so here.  I admire the fact that counsel believes me to be this ever-vigilant guardian of Atlasia's voting booths, but the truth is that I do not read every vote cast in every election.  I happened to notice campaigning in this instance and thought that it should be addressed.  Whether or not I did or did not sue on similar instances in the past should have no bearing on this case.

The Mideast Campaigning in Voting Booths Statute states that campaigning is defined as "Any statement that encourages voters to cast a vote for a particular candidate or option, except in the case of a voter casting their vote."[4]  That clause means that other that merely marking an "X" or preferencing a candidate (the only two valid methods of casting a vote) should not be considered to be campaigning.  For instance, even though how the head of a party votes may influence other voters (who then follow his vote), this is not campaigning.  Here, drj101 was not casting any vote; she was giving commentary that was completely superfluous to casting her actual vote.  By calling ZuWo and Cathcon "boring", drj101 was encouraging voters to cast their votes for someone other than ZuWo/Cathcon.  As pointed out in the poll above, voters are less likely to vote for "boring" candidates.

Furthermore, as both ZuWo and Cathcon are voters in the Mideast, the clause that defines campaigning as "Any statement that has the intent of insulting another voter" would also apply.

The vote cast by drj101 also violates Art. III, §1, cl. 2, which says, "Campaigning may not occur in the place where voting occurs. Any person who campaigns in such a place will have their vote counted as void".[5]

Even if the court finds that drj101's vote did not violate Mideast law (because it advocated against, rather than explicitly for, a candidate), it clearly violates the federal constitution, which prohibits all types of campaigning.

Defendant's counsel also brings up the issue of the Supremacy Clause in his brief.  This is merely a red herring.  Simply because the SOFE has not been upholding the law does not mean that the Mideast Region cannot.  The Supremacy Clause means that regional laws cannot supersede federal laws or the federal Constitution.  This is not the case here.  The regional law merely supplements the federal Constitution by further defining what "campaigning" is.  The Supremacy Clause has nothing to do with the fact that the SOFE has, in the past, ignored the rules on campaigning in the voting booth.

The facts are clear: drj101 campaigned against ZuWo and Cathcon in the voting booth, and for that, her vote should not have been counted.  The allowance of campaigning must be stopped, not used an excuse for it to continue.

Request for Relief
Plaintiff requests that the Court direct the Governor to recertify the May 2013 election results with drj101's entire ballot being considered invalid.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I was unaware that we had two women now on this forum.   My apologies to the defense counsel.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Even if counsel for the defendant is correct in her interpretation of regional law, the regional law is more narrow than federal law, so even if the defendant's argument is valid when it comes to the regional law, drj101's vote still violated federal laws against campaigning in the voting booth.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I believe that drj101 intentionally used language that she knew or reasonably should have known would cause voters to be less likely to vote for ZuWo and Cathcon.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I do not have any.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

So can we get a ruling here?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I thank the Court for its time.