Atlas Forum Supreme Court Case: Akno21 vs. Fritz

[KEmperor]

The Court will hear testimony regarding the legitimacy of NixonNow's vote in the midterm elections.  I advise that Akno, Fritz, and NixonNow be prepared to testify before the court soon.

[Fritz]

I suggest that the hearing of evidence in this case be delayed until voting in the election has concluded, to determine the relevance of this matter.

[KEmperor]

I suggest that the hearing of evidence in this case be delayed until voting in the election has concluded, to determine the relevance of this matter.

The voting will end tomorrow.  After that time, procedings will begin.

[Akno21]

I will be read to testify, when the time comes.

[Niles Caulder]

Your reliable Forum technocrat diligently points out:

Shouldn't this lawsuit be directed at  the Secretary of Forum Affairs for counting the ballots, rather than the voters who cast them?

[Keystone Phil]

Your reliable Forum technocrat diligently points out:

Shouldn't this lawsuit be directed at  the Secretary of Forum Affairs for counting the ballots, rather than the voters who cast them?

Excellent point Niles. I was about to bring that up myself.

[KEmperor]

You're absolutely right, my mistake.

[Akno21]

It's been changed to vs. Fritz.

[qwerty]

I will be prepared to testify.

[Akno21]

I will be out all day and not able to testify until 10 PM or so, so if i don't respond to something important here, it's NOT because I forgot about the case or do not wish to go through with it.

[Fritz]

Voting doesn't close until midnight tonight, so I dont think we'll be hearing any testimony until tomorrow.

[MAS117]

I think that we should the proceddings on AIM in a chatroom, tis the easist way? Does eeveryone agree.

[Akno21]

I think that we should the proceddings on AIM in a chatroom, tis the easist way? Does eeveryone agree.

If we could gt everyone in it, it would be good, but it would be unfair if someone couldn't make a lot of the times, because then they might look bad because they weren't able to show up for the proceedings.

[KEmperor]

I will do my best to coordinate a time so all of us can be online at the same time.  I know MAS is not going to have a lot of internet access for the next week, I will see what times are good for Nym.

[Niles Caulder]

I'd love to be a court observer if possible, but obviously priority must be given to participants.

But isn't conducting the case on this thread a better option?  It's already officially titled, and the Plaintiff and Respondent can make written submissions of their arguments here.  The jurists can then ask questions of them if they so desire, but really the whole kit-n-kaboodle wouldn't take that long, certainly less than a week.

(The Jurists can still deliberate in private to determine their consensus, and that will simplify the scheduling even further!)

And then the legal decisions (majority and dissenting, if any) can be posted here.

(If I have to vote in public for every Fantasy citizen to see, I want Supreme Court Cases on record!)

[Akno21]

I agree with Niles, although I will go along with whatever the court decides.

[Fritz]

Honorable Justices of the Supreme Court,

I thank your honors for the opportunity to present evidence in this case.  The disqualification of a questionable vote is a serious matter, and a decision I feel that the Court is better qualified to make, than I as Secretary of Forum Affairs.

Here is a quote of the vote being called into question:

RReagan117

We all recall the debacle of the recounts that occurred in the State of Florida in the 2000 U.S. Presidential election.  Those counting the ballots had to examine them for hanging chads, dimpled chads, etc.  The objective of this exercise was to determine the intent of the voter.

That is what I have attempted to do in the current case.  My initial reaction was that the intent of the voter was clearly to cast a vote for RReagan4EVER.  Thus, I ruled accordingly.

Since making that decision, I have heard compelling arguments, notably from Keystone Phil and Senator John F. Kennedy, that the intent of the voter was not abundantly clear in this case.  The name given in the vote is a combination of 2 names that are both candidates for the office.

It should also be noted that the candidate himself, RReagan4EVER, has stated his opinion that he does not feel the vote should be counted as a vote for him:

I agree. The vote should not be counted.

For these reasons, I ask the Court to reverse my earlier decision, disqualify the vote, and declare Senator Akno21 the winner of this election.

Again I thank the Court for hearing my testimony.  I trust your honors to consider all the evidence presented carefully, and reach a fair and legal decision in this matter.

[MAS117]

I guess we can just do it in this thread then, if the Chief Justice agrees, as well as Justice Nym. I'd like to thank Sec. of Forum Affairs Fritz for his testimony. The evidence and recommendation will be taken into consideration by the court. Thank you.

[Akno21]

In the District 2A Senate election this weekend NixonNow cast a vote for someone named RReagan117.

RReagan117

There is no candidate who is named RReagan117. Secretary of Forum Affairs, Fritz, issued this ruling after his vote,

NixonNow's vote for Reagan117 will be counted as a vote for RReagan4EVER in district 2A.  I think the intent of the voter was clear in this case.  His vote for Keystone Phil will not be counted, however, as he does not reside in that district.

These are the decisions of the Secretary of Forum Affairs on these matters.  Disagreements may be addressed to the Supreme Court.

Normally, I might not see a problem with this. But, also running in the race as a serious Write in Candidate is MAS 117. NixonNow's vote merged the names of RReagan4EVER and MAS 117. I do not believe it is
clear to tell who he voted for, and therefore take issue with Fritz's ruling. NixonNow's vote should not be counted for RReagan4EVER.

It is also important to consider who we are dealing with here. In some cases, the merging of two candidates may have been a simple mistake. However, with NixonNow's record of creating confusion and generally exhibiting behavior that is not orderly, I highly doubt this is an
innocent mistake. His vote was not accompanied by any other words, such as (R-OH) next to the candidate listed. If he had put RReagan117 (R-OH) instead, than it would be clear what his intent was. He delivered no other signs in his vote that he meant to vote for RReagan4EVER.
Also, in the District 2B election, NixonNow voted for a candidate named Bobo.

i vote for bobo

There was no candidate named Bobo. However, there was a candidate named Bono. Since he also botched the name on this vote, I believe this is proof that NixonNow's votes were purposely confusing and not meant to be real, true votes.

The vote is a mix of two candidates, not a vote for one, and therefore it should not be counted for RReagan4EVER.

[Akno21]

The Secretary took upon himself the privilege of replacing a voter's [invalid] ballot.  While this Secretary's honor and sense of  fairness is beyond reproach, permitting the Office such leeway is a detrimental precedent to the Electoral System of the Forum.

With the precedent of "interpreting" ballots left to the Secretary, a future office holder is almost certainly to be put in the position of a conflict of interest, while holding common allegiance of Party, Ideology, or Friendship with one candidate above another.

As stated in the Constitution, Amendment V: "All Fantasy Elections at the Forum must be conducted in a fair manner as to insure equality for all members."

All members were informed of the procedures of casting a legal ballot. The candidates running for office were clearly posted at the official voting booth, with no misspellings made on the part of the Secretary.
Voters were strongly advised to check their ballot carefully. This degree of formality and clarity serves a very important purpose:
that of providing for elections beyond reproach and confusion.

The permission of misspelled ballots to the degree that the Secretary must interpret which name to extract out of a fusion of two namesis a step the Forum's electoral process must not take. THIS ballot may be felt to be "discernable" by many, but obviously by no margin sufficient to overcome a significant controversial doubt.  It was Joseph Stalin who said, "Those who cast the ballots decide nothing; those who count the ballots decide everything." We must not prove him right.

The Amendment also states, "No member should feel left out of the election process and everyone's ideas must be heard in order to insure that we have a Atlas Forum of the people, by the people, and for the people."

There will be a strong appeal from the respondent that judging the ballot invalid will violate the spirit herein expressed. However, this is clearly a matter of personal responsibility, not of the executive government's and not of the Court's.  The voter simply failed to make HIMSELF clearly heard by a system very acutely listening for him.
The Forum cannot take upon itself the responsibility of accomodating such behavior for voters without doing so for EVERY voter. And if the system tried to accomodate garbled ballots for every voter, once again the power of deciding elections Clearly rests in the hands of the Government Counters. By seeking to stretch the net of "sympathy" for this voter now, we risk it breaking and failing to protect the same sense of fairness of the conscientious body of voters: that their extra attention to casting a ballot as legally instructed is a threshhold
EQUALLY expected of every other voter as well.

[MAS117]

I'd also like to thank the distinguished Senator from Maryland for his testimony in the case of Akno21 v. Fritz. This evidence and intake in the case will also be taken into consideration by the Atlas Forum Supreme Court. The court would also like to hear testimony from any other witnesses, and RReaganfan4EVER. If the Chief Justice would permit me, I might have some questions for the witnesses who gave there testimony already. Thank you.

[StevenNick]

I wish to address the court as the Chairman of the AFRNC.

As many of you may remember, the Supreme Court ruled in 2000 that the practice of judging a vote based on the implied intent of the voter was not an appropriate means of judging the results of an election.  Any decisions based on the assumed intent of the voter is bound to be subjective in nature and therefore call into question the entire electoral process.

I therefore call for the decision of Sec. Forum Affairs Fritz to be overturned by this court.  57opinion's vote should be thrown out.

However, the voter's intent may be a relevent and fair means of judging the results of an election if the intent of the voter may be confirmed by the voter himself.  I propose that 57opinion's original vote be thrown out and the voter be given a chance to recast his ballot.

[qwerty]

Mr. Chief Justice and Honorable Associate Justices of the highest court of our forum:

After being awake for over 24 hours, on August 21, I casted the vote in question, for "RReagan117". I intended to vote for RReagan4Ever, but being so fatuige, I casted my vote wrong.

I would also like to address the issue of my vote for "Bobo" - it was my understanding that was the canidate's name. It appears, however, that I mis-read. I now realize that the gentleman's name is "Bono".

I believe that this vote should be counted in RReagan4Ever's favor, however, I will respect and accept the courts decision whatever it may be. I would like to apologise to both canidates for the confusion this has caused.

[KEmperor]

Firstly, I would like to say I appreciate all three of the interested parties for giving such prompt and clear testimony.  If Justice MAS117 has any questions, I would like him to feel free to ask them now.  Once Justice Nym90 arrives, he will have his turn as well.

[Akno21]

So the justices will have an opportunity to interrogate the witnesses based on their responses? Does the opposing side (in this case me, I guess) recieve an opportunity to question the other witnesses, i. e. NixonNow, as well?