Simfan v. the Imperial Dominion of the South

[Simfan34]

Your honours,

I would like to file suit against the Imperial Dominion of the South on behalf of the Canadian-Atlasian Loyalist Friendship Society (CALFS). I contend that the Canadian Territories Act passed by that Region is contrary to the Constitution of the Republic of Atlasia.

In particular, I contend that the Act is in contravention with art. 1, § 5, cl. 20, which states that "[The Senate shall a have the sole power]... to promote Comity between Nations by engaging in such activities with other Nations as are of mutual benefit" as well as art. 1, § 7, cls. 1, 4, and 8, which state, respectively, that "No Region shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation, save that with the Consent of the Senate they may enter into Agreements or Compacts with other Regions for purposes of handling Specific Issues which affect more than one Region but which do not affect the Republic of Atlasia as a Whole", "No Region may grant any Title of Nobility", and "No Region shall, without the Consent of the Senate, enter into any Agreement or Compact with a foreign Power."

Furthermore, your honours, I would like to deeply apologise for the my prior deletion of my filing. It was a reckeless move on my part. I hope you can forgive me.

Simfan

[Oakvale]

I see this case has magically returned. Oh well, we'd made our decision regardless. Can the South please pick someone to represent them?

Official Atlasia Supreme Court Release
Nyman, DC

Writ of Certiorari

The Atlasian Supreme Court grants certiorari to hear the question of whether the Imperial Dominion of the South's Canadian Territories Act of 2013 violates  Art. I, § 5, cl. 20 of the Constitution of Atlasia.

Schedule

Petitioner has seventy-two hours to file his brief.  It is expected no later than 6:00PM EDT on Saturday, March 22, 2014.

Respondent has an additional seventy-two hours to file his brief.  It is expected no later than 6:00PM EDT on Tuesday, March 25, 2014.

Amicus Briefs will be accepted until 6:00PM EDT on Tuesday, March 25, 2014, unless the filing party can show sufficient need.

Additional time may be granted to either party upon a showing of sufficient need, and the right of either party to respond to the filed briefs may be granted upon request.

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.

[CatoMinor]

May I ask what Simfan's standing here is?

[Simfan34]

I was admitted to the (now-abolished) Atlasian Bar.

[Oakvale]

May I ask what Simfan's standing here is?

Standing to sue has not been required under Atlasian legal precedent for several years at this point.

[Adam Griffin]

[Simfan34]

Your honours,

I have been faced with a sudden assignment to speak about the Korean coup d'etat of 1979. I would like to request an extension until 9:00PM EDT on Tuesday, March 25th, if it would please the court.

[Oakvale]

That's fine Simfan. Respondent's deadline is also extended, until 9:00PM EDT, Friday, March 28 2014.

[Simfan34]

Your Honours,

I present my case on behalf of the CALFS, which is dedicated to advancing Atlasian-Canadian friendship and close relations. However, we have been disturbed by recent legislation in this country, passed in several regions now, taking particular exception to the recent Act passed by the Southern Legislature. On 16 March 2014, Jbrase signed the Canadian Territories Act into law, which is reproduced below.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This act is presumably empowered by the Atlasian-Canadian Common Market Agreement, particularly art. V, §5, cl. b thereof, which states that

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The law places those three provinces (Newfoundland and Labrador, Prince Edward Island, and Nova Scotia) under "Limited Jursidiction Authority". Unfortunately, the Agreement does not define what "Limited Jursidiction Authority" precisely is, and Black's Law Dictionary defines the term "limited jurisdiction" as "the authority or jurisdiction of a lower court," which is not of relevance to the issue. However, there is an emphasis placed on the fact that this jurisdiction is limited, that it is not absolute, and this is obvious- Canada remains a sovereign entity.

In contrast, the Act states that the three provinces constitute the "newly-annexed Canadian provinces. It aspires to "welcome the Canadian provinces... and all of their residents, as newest members of our humble territory," issues an "acknowledgement of [the three] Canadian provinces", and incorporates these provinces as "territory" of its districts." This is in clear contravention to art. V, §4(b) (there appear to two §4s?) of the Agreement, which states that

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It should be clear, your honours, that the Agreement does not sanction "annexation" or "incorporation" of Canadian provinces or territories as it would constitute blatantly "weakening Canadian...national sovereignty" which the Agreement explicitly states it does not empower or endorse. The Agreement does not empower the regions to legislate for or with the Canadian provinces and territories it places under their respective "Limited Jurisdiction Authority", merely for Atlasian citizens resident in those respective provinces and territories to be registered in the corresponding Region.

The Act states in §2 that it welcomes "the provinces... and all their residents" as "members" of the Region, which is again not endorsed by art. V, §5, cl. b of the Agreement, which only applies to "Atlasian citizens living in Newfoundland and Labrador, Prince Edward Island, and Nova Scotia", and not all residents of the three provinces.

What I have just said, I believe, merely lays out the case on why the Agreement does not empower the regions to take such actions. But the Constitution, furthermore, prohibits the regions from taking such actions. Art. 1, § 5, cl. 20 of the Constitution states that "[The Senate shall have the sole power]... to promote Comity between Nations by engaging in such activities with other Nations as are of mutual benefit". As Canada is a separate sovereign entity, it constitutes another Nation, as per the constitutional definition.

The provisions of the Act empowers the IDS to engage in activity with the provinces of other nations, which is the sole power of the Senate as art. 1, § 5, cl. 20 states- meaning that the provisions of the Act, as they are not authorised by the Agreement, are in contravention to the Constitution. For this reason, I ask that the Court strike down the offending portions of the Act (which appears to be the Act in its entirety) and apply this to all affected jurisdictions of the Agreement.

I look forwards to your questions. Thank you for your time.

[CatoMinor]

Your honors, I have just spoken with the author of this law and we recognize the issue of the wording. We have no issue with fixing it. The law will be amended to be brought within what is acceptable the first chance the IDS Legislature gets.

With that said I ask that the case be dismissed.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

I concur.  The bill in question will be written and introduced once the Legislature is done considering another emergency bill that is on the floor, which should be in a day or two.

[Simfan34]

I ask that the case be dismissed.

On what grounds? Surely the disinclination of the respondent to issue a defense are not valid grounds for dismissal. Certiorari has already been granted. I'm quite sure you can only make a defense or decline to do so at this juncture.

[CatoMinor]

I ask that the case be dismissed.

On what grounds?

That I honestly don't want to waste more time than is necessary. We see where we messed up and are working to fix it.  Why need we continue with the case?

[Oakvale]

Official Atlasia Supreme Court Release
Nyman, DC

Notice of Dismissal

Given that the defendant region in this case has repealed the offending parts of the legislation under question, the Court does not believe it would be prudent to attempt to issue a judgement on the matter at hand.

The case is dismissed.