Atlasia vs. RileyKeaton

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I am filing an injunction against Mideast Governor RileyKeaton for the unlawful appointment of Cassius to the vacant regional Senate seat.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

To the first bold, RileyKeaton unilaterally nominated Cassius without the acknowledged consent of TJ. Secondly, a vote was not called until after 110 hours, violating the 96-hour minimum. The vote was called by RileyKeaton, who is not Mideast Speaker. I ask the Mideast Regional Court to deal with this violation of the regional constitution as soon as possible.

[Badger]

I am filing an injunction against Mideast Governor RileyKeaton for the unlawful appointment of Cassius to the vacant regional Senate seat.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

To the first bold, RileyKeaton unilaterally nominated Cassius without the acknowledged consent of TJ. Secondly, a vote was not called until after 110 hours, violating the 96-hour minimum. The vote was called by RileyKeaton, who is not Mideast Speaker. I ask the Mideast Regional Court to deal with this violation of the regional constitution as soon as possible.

The Court has preliminary questions for Petitioner regarding two issues:

1) Standing: Your claim is based on an alleged violation of Mideast statute, but to the Court's recollection Petitioner isn't a resident/voter of this region. Please confirm or correct this.

If not, and standing is asserted under an argument to the effect that he and all Atlasians are governed in part by the Senate to which Cassius has been appointed, how does petitioner respond to the counter-argument that this is a severely attenuated basis to establish standing to challenge what is, again, based on this region's statutory framework to fill Senate vacancies as it sees fit?

EDIT: The Court is of course aware of Petitioner's status as Atlasia A-G, but how does that change the question of how the federal government has standing to raise a challenge based on regional statute rather than on some federal basis?

2) Remedy: Since the second portion of the statute you allege to have been violated,  regarding an assembly vote needing to be held within 96 hours, doesn't set a remedy, what remedy would you recommend this Court fashion if it finds in your favor? A prompt re-vote? If so, with all deference to the statute's plain language of 96 hours, do you have any reason to believe the vote was flawed/altered or might now change if re-held again now? If not, wouldn't at least this portion of your suit be moot?

The Court issues the following standard orders for the pendency of this matter:

A) Any arguments/pleading posted in this thread requires the poster to immediately after posting (or notice beforehand of a forthcoming post even) to notify the Court and any/all parties who've made an appearance in this case via PM.

B) References to statutes, court decisions, constitutional provisions, or other legal authority must include a link to said authority the first time cited.

The Court will not yet rule on Petitioner's request for injunction, as it must consider the issue of standing further.

SO ORDERED,
X Justice Badger

[Badger]

I've modified the case heading as FORMER Governor RileyKeaton resigned a few hours prior to this being filed. It falls to TJ from Cleveland to represent the administration as Lt. Gov (and current acting Gov, plus presumably soon to be Governor once he swears in).

[Badger]

Upon further review, the Court notes that while the injunction is phrased as being sought against Riley Keaton (or now TJ from Cleveland), the Court interprets this as seeking an injunction against Cassius being appointed/sworn-in as senator. Cassius, however, already swore in as Senator over 3 weeks ago. The Court does not believe that this request for injunction to effectively suspend Cassius as Senator for the duration of this suit is either timely under the circumstances, and accordingly denies the request for temporary injunction.

The Court does NOT, however, dismiss the lawsuit itself, as there is at least a reasonable probability that a finding for Petitioner in this case could result in this Court ordering Cassius's senate appointment invalidated.

However (again), before the Court allows the suit to progress further it will require Petitioner to answer the Court's previously posed questions regarding potential remedy and (especially) standing.

Potential opposing parties with legitimate standing, including but not necessarily limited to Acting Gov. TJ and/or Senator Cassius, are free to post argument/pleadings to the contrary, including prior to Petitioner's response. If an opposing party specifically wishes a reasonable period to respond only after Petitioner's response, they must note so ASAP. Otherwise the Court reserves the right to rule on Petitioner's response regarding whether the suit may at least proceed at any time after it is posted.

SO ORDERED
X Justice Badger

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

My proposed remedy would be a mere formality--TJ could reappoint Cassius and this would all be a bit pointless. Thus, if the injunction has been denied, I am dropping the suit.

[Simfan34]

And the side effect would be to invalidate all of Cassius' votes during that period, yes?

[DemPGH]

Article III stipulates one month as the time limit for suits, so we are within that.

Because proper procedure was not followed, Cassius should be required to be re-appointed from the time this suit was filed and proper protocol followed.

The reason why the A.G. filed this suit is because it affects matters for all of Atlasia, and that the Mideast Constitution was violated.

May it please the court,

-DemPGH

[Badger]

Article III stipulates one month as the time limit for suits, so we are within that.

Because proper procedure was not followed, Cassius should be required to be re-appointed and proper protocol followed.

The reason why the A.G. filed this suit is because it affects matters for all of Atlasia, and that the Miseast Constitution was violated.

May it please the court,

-DemPGH

Mr. President:

Although future pleadings and arguments should be made by Attorney General Snowstalker as your administration's duly appointed and confirmed legal counsel, the Court will nevertheless gladly respond to your "unofficial amicus".


I readily agree that the lawsuit itself isn't barred by a statute of limitations, the Court is exercising it's discretion to not issue a preliminary injunction suspending Senator Cassius from his position over three weeks after he's taken office. Whether his appointment may be ultimately vacated by this Court is a matter yet to be determined.

While the issue of standing has yet to be addressed by A-G Snowstalker, and thus not yet fully considered by the Court, it will be of of great interest to see whether grounds for standing are raised other than the Senate being a national institution, because the method of filling vacancies to said institution on which the challenge is based, is unquestionably an issue of Mideastern statutory interpretation.


The underlying merits of the challenge will be considered when and if the suit is permitted to proceed.

Finally, I would remind all petitioners (small p) of the Court's standing order that notice must be given the Court and all parties of appearance via PM whenever an argument or pleading is posted to this thread. Thank you for your anticipated compliance.

[TJ in Oregon]

The Mideast Region believes first that the President, not being a citizen of the Mideast Region, has no standing to file suit over the appointment of Senator Cassius. Secondly, the Mideast Region will argue that the appointment of Senator Cassius was conducted in accordance with the only reasonable interpretation possible of the text of the Mideast Constitution. Should the lawsuit be permitted to proceed, I will demonstrate on behalf of the Region the two points outlined above.

[windjammer]

Will I be able to post an amicus brief even if I'm not a Mideast citizen Mideast Chief Justice Badger?

[Badger]

Will I be able to post an amicus brief even if I'm not a Mideast citizen Mideast Chief Justice Badger?

I suppose. though Id coordinate with your boss first.

[windjammer]

Will I be able to post an amicus brief even if I'm not a Mideast citizen Mideast Chief Justice Badger?

I suppose. though Id coordinate with your boss first.

My boss? I'm not VP anymore.

[Badger]

Will I be able to post an amicus brief even if I'm not a Mideast citizen Mideast Chief Justice Badger?

I suppose. though Id coordinate with your boss first.

My boss? I'm not VP anymore.

Aren't you now Deputy A-G?

[windjammer]

Will I be able to post an amicus brief even if I'm not a Mideast citizen Mideast Chief Justice Badger?

I suppose. though Id coordinate with your boss first.

My boss? I'm not VP anymore.

Aren't you now Deputy A-G?

I resigned as well.

[Badger]

Will I be able to post an amicus brief even if I'm not a Mideast citizen Mideast Chief Justice Badger?

I suppose. though Id coordinate with your boss first.

My boss? I'm not VP anymore.

Aren't you now Deputy A-G?

I resigned as well.

Then on what basis could you file an amicus? There doesn't need to be nearly the same nexus with the case or parties as standing (e.g. AG Snowstalker would unquestionably have grounds to file amicus at least). Arguably other senators might. What would your basis be?

[Badger]

And the side effect would be to invalidate all of Cassius' votes during that period, yes?

The Court rarely issues speculative rulings, but the answer here is clearly no.

[Badger]

My proposed remedy would be a mere formality--TJ could reappoint Cassius and this would all be a bit pointless. Thus, if the injunction has been denied, I am dropping the suit.

GRRRRRR. Having missed this post, I wish, Mr. AG, you would've followed the Court's order to PM notice of pleadings. Instead the Courts been awaiting your response for no reason. 

Motion to dismiss granted.
X Justice Badger

[windjammer]

Will I be able to post an amicus brief even if I'm not a Mideast citizen Mideast Chief Justice Badger?

I suppose. though Id coordinate with your boss first.

My boss? I'm not VP anymore.

Aren't you now Deputy A-G?

I resigned as well.

Then on what basis could you file an amicus? There doesn't need to be nearly the same nexus with the case or parties as standing (e.g. AG Snowstalker would unquestionably have grounds to file amicus at least). Arguably other senators might. What would your basis be?

Just because I'm more and more passionate by the judiciary system of America (so Atlasia).