Public Discussion on the Supreme Court Cases (Avoid Cluttering Case Threads)

[Badger]

Yeah, the litigous atmosphere (coupled with a hyperactive AG) is no good.

I don't think the seemingly constant litigation has to do with the AG overreaching than it does the AG merely doing his job in prosecuting an overreaching statute.

Blaming a lawyer for the underlying law is like blaming a linebacker for sacking the quarterback.

[Badger]

<Reposted from original thread>

Greetings Fellow Atlasians:

After over a week of deliberation I have decided to offer my legal services to anyone---regardless of party affiliation---who wishes to challenge the constitutionality of the Privacy Protection Act. While I understand the intent of its authors is assuredly well-meaning---to try fostering civility and reducing the opportunity for backstabbing and resulting grudges---the effect of the law has been a chilling of the paramount rights to free speech and a free press. I believe that these issues must be addressed by our Supreme Court post haste regardless of whether one supports or opposes the law. I offer my professional legal services for precisely this challenge.

I realize I am taking a political risk doing this only two days before an election, but conscience dictates that I follow this path. To those who generally support the law and seek only to reform it, I must point out that the Court's guidance will be crucial in determining exactly to what extent and under what circumstances the law may be implemented. To those who see the law as unconditionally fair and just, I can only state again that my conscience requires I defend those whose right to free speech is so compromised.

I advised AG Bgwah that I was considering this course, and for the record I do NOT believe he has been in any way overreaching or selective in his enforcement of this law; rather I believe he is merely doing his job in enforcing a law that is by it's nature overbroad and intrusive to free speech and open political discourse.

While I reserve the right to decline representation based on the individual merits of a case, conflicts of interest, or time constraints, again, no one will be turned away based on party affiliation or political ideology.

So come on in to the parlor, folks. Have a refreshment and tell this simple country lawyer what the problem is....

[Badger]

On that note, I am more than happy to defend the constitutionality of the law, whether by trying the case or submitting an amicus on behalf of the State.

Feel free to bring your documents over to my office for a discussion counsel. I'll provide the standard meeting refreshment..... :-)

[Badger]

Other than Al and Franzl it seems all of these people complaining about this were'nt here when this law was passed and don't have any memory of the problems that happened before it was passed.  If you had been guys you would know that we need it and why it is here for the benefit of us all, except the people who want to break the law.

Trust me Hap, I know exactly what you're talking about. From only my few months in Atlasia I have a very good idea of what headaches and annoyances allowing posting of PM's will cause, and I don't like the idea.

That said, my belief is the statute so broadly chills free speech and the free press that, in this case, the cure is simply worse than the disease. Not to say the underlying disease doesn't still suck though.... :-P

[Badger]

Well then, we disagree.

Maybe a real lawyer could explain this.  Badger, you out there?

Well, I'll offer one lawyer's perspective anyway. Find another and pay his retainer and you'll likely get a contrary opinion.

I agree that the federal constitution takes precedence in any conflict with regional constitutional provisions. Note Clause 2 of the same section (subsequently repealed by the 18th Amendment, but doesn't change it's applicability here) also explicitly applies to federal and regional officeholders.

 I likewise agree the Atlasia Constitution's language on this subject is crystal clear. "any level of government" means exactly that; from President and senator down to regional assembly member. "The Republic of Atlasia" is as all encompassing term to include the regions rather than merely the federal government itself, the same as "The United States of America" includes all 50 states and the various territories.

Regarding standing, I don't think it was necessary to do away with it here as the A-G clearly has standing to enforce the laws of Atlasia which obviously includes provisions of the Atlasian Constitution. That said I don't mourn dumping the Court's dumping the standing provision as a RL matter that doesn't fit well at all in our game much as Peter described above.

Now Franzl makes an interesting point in that there is no explicit penalty stated for violation of this constitutional provision as there are for statutes. For a legislative statute this deficiency can actually render enforcement of its provisions null and void. When the Ohio Legislature revamped driving license laws a couple years ago, it included penalties for persons with expired licenses depending on the length of expiration (< or > 6 months) and number of prior convictions, but forgot to include penalties for individuals caught driving who never had a license at all. Thus for a brief period of time until the oversight was corrected it was essentially legal to drive a car in Ohio if you never had a license. Ah, our state leg....

I don't believe that's a problem here, however, as constitutional provisions rarely include an actual penalty provision. In the absence of additional federal or regional penalties, it would seem prohibition on holding a second office would make the act of holding multiple offices a nullity. If the Court (likely) rules against Libertas, it is axiomatic it has the power to deny him from holding both offices.

With that in mind, based on practice and precedent in the swearing-in thread, it would appear that Libertas taking the oath as NE Lt. Gov. acted to immediately terminate his office as NE Rep., and his subsequently taking the oath as (reelected) NE Rep. was a nullity. Hence making Libertas NE. Lt. Governor and creating a vacancy in the NE Assembly.

Hope that helps. I'll be sending my bill shortly.