United Cities/Court/Archive
Below are cases heard pertaining to the interpretation of the old constitution. This page is purely for historical purposes.
Case #1
Filed: by Skelezomperman on 12/25/2016
Complaint: camelfantasy and godzilltrain were both promoted to Governor during the voting of Resolutions 23, 24, and 25. I would like to litigate to see which council they should vote in. I argue for the General Assembly, and this has been pre-established by camel, however I would like to have a legal precedent.
Dismissed: on 12/28/2016
Reason for Dismissal: As the Security Council no longer exists and the resolutions in question were not affected by the change in council membership, there is no need for the Court to hear this case.
Case #2
Filed: by Yellowitcher on 12/31/2016
Complaint: Hello, I'm willing you not to allow _Kastle, mine_man, Cal76 and Narnia17 to run for the January 2017 elections. If you go on the Feline PAC page you'll find pictures telling people to vote "yes" on Canadian deportation and attacking canadian people, thus I think their ideas are too dangerous for the United Cities and the server. Even if they are supposed not to be serious we shouldn't agree with that.
Dismissed: on 1/1/2017
Reason for Dismissal: There is no legal basis to remove any candidate from an election due to their opinion or the opinion of any group or individual endorsing them. The claim is dismissed without a hearing.
Case #3
Filed: by PtldKnight on 1/16/2017
Complaint: I am hereby filing an complaint on my ejection from co-chairman of the roads committee as I was put on said board by jphgolf4321 after Soleurs, the previous chair of the committee, left the UC. On 1/16/17 jph made a new board of the committee which, I was not a part of, replacing me with AP_Red, a practice over which he had no power of. I currently have evidence of what jph applying me about the committee's board on 12/27/16 which I am able to present when needed.
Declaration of Failure to Proceed: This case has been unable to proceed due to the negligence of the Chief Justice to respond to the case within 48 hours of the case being filed. Upon the signature of this affidavit by both Associate Justices, the case will proceed with a hearing presided over by the Secretary of State and the Associate Justices, pursuant to the clauses of Amendment 6.
Signature of Associate Justice A: Click here to see KittyCat11231's user page! Seriously. I dare you. 21:02, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Signature of Associate Justice B: InDev (talk) 21:50, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Hearing Date: 1/18/2017
Presiding Justices: Acting Chief Justice Narnia171, Associate Justice KittyCat11231, Associate Justice _InDev_
1Due to the failure of Chief Justice AlikSong to respond to the complaint within 48 hours of it being filed, pursuant to the procedure detailed in Amendment 6, an affidavit was signed by Associate Justices KittyCat11231 and _InDev_ declaring a failure to proceed due to the absence of the Chief Justice. The affidavit is shown below. As there was a vacancy in the position of Secretary of State at the time of this case, the Vice President Narnia17 was responsible for presiding in place of the Chief Justice, but did not receive a vote in the final decision.
Decision: The United Cities court has determined that Ptld's case against jphgolf4321 has no standing. Ptld's complaint was that he, without the authority, was removed from the AX0 committee. The court has ruled that, due to the language of Amendment 3 establishing Soleurs as the committee chair and not authorizing any contingency plan regarding the leadership of the committee, and that it did not authorize jph to unilaterally give control of the committee to Ptld, Ardy, and Narnia, the appointments were unconstitutional and invalid. The court has also ruled that jph did act under proper authority when establishing the new roads committee, which was done pursuant to the text of Amendment 26. However, Amendment 26 specifically states that a committee may not be dissolved without the passage of a resolution, and as such the AX0 committee legally exists, albeit without a chairperson. The court recommends that action be taken by the United Cities in the form of a resolution to dissolve the AX0 committee in order to avoid further legal action.
Majority: Associate Justice KittyCat11231, Associate Justice _InDev_
Dissent: None
Case #4
Filed: by jphgolf4321 on 3/4/2017
Complaint: I would like to file a complaint over the voting on Resolution 65. The voting form clearly states that a "YEA" or a "NAY" vote is required, and those who have used any other terminology in the past have had their votes changed to the correct terms. There was one vote, a "YUP", in this vote, that was neither. Despite two attempts to replace this vote with the proper "YEA," the voter in question changed his vote back to a "YUP" each time. Because of this, I believe Resolution 65 should not have passed 12 YEA - 11 NAY and instead ended in an 11-11 tie (with the irregular vote thrown out) to be broken by vote of the Vice President. In addition I recuse myself from any court proceedings on this case and request that KittyCat11231 recuse himself as well seeing as he proposed the Resolution in question and vigorously campaigned for its passage. I would also hope to exclude anyone who voted on this resolution from the selection of replacement justices to avoid any possible conflict of interest.
Hearing Date: 4/4/2017
Presiding Justice(s): Chief Justice cal76
Preliminary Order: Whilst this case is still on going, the President of the United Cities may sign the bill into law if they want to or not. However, the law will not be in effect whilst the case is ongoing. (NO Longer in effect)
Decision:
The UC Court finds this case in favour of the defence, against jphgolf4321.
The only real statement requiring the usage of the terms “YEA” or “NAY” within the UC documentation was added before Resolution 1 in the early days of the UC. It was not added to the constitution itself and therefore cannot be an official rule of the UC but instead merely a guideline that does not have to be followed.
Godz usage of “YUP” can be defined as him voting for the bill. The definition of “yup” in the Oxford English Dictionary is as follows:
variant spelling of yep
This is not a clear definition, so a further inquiry reveals the definition of “yep” as:
non-standard spelling of yes, representing informal pronunciation
Therefore, the usage of the word “YUP” has been proven to be a yes or yea vote. Any argument about “YUP” possibly being short for “Yuppie” is invalid, as the word yuppie does not contextualise at all with the voting poll. If it did, then further deliberation would be required, but since it is not, the decision was fairly quick.
There is also the matter that whilst Godz did not reveal this in the hearing (As both sides rested their cases before Godz could testify, therefore closing the case early), but revealed privately that he supported and did indeed vote for the bill. Both Skele and Camel even edited Godz vote to “YEA” from “YUP” before it was changed back to the original vote from Godz. That shows that other members clearly knew that Godz vote was for the bill passing.
So the court has decided that henceforth immediately, the bill will have passed the general assembly, and if signed by the President, will be allowed to become law. However, to try and avoid any confusion the Chief Justice proposes the following resolution.
Any future vote on a resolution in the United Cities must be voted on with either a vote stating “YEA” or “NAY”. In the case where a vote can be different from the two options provided, that must be stated somewhere within the resolution.
Case Closed: 4/4/2017 2:56am BST
Signed, Chief Justice
cal76
(\/) (°,,,°) (\/)
Majority: Chief Justice cal76
Dissent: None
Case #5
Filed: by KittyCat11231 on May 1, 2017
Complaint: As Attorney General, I am filing this complaint in concern over a certain irregularity in the resolution proposal process for Resolution 84.
The original version of this resolution was withdrawn and the resolution reset, with votes removed and the time limit adjusted, such that a revised version of the resolution could be proposed. This action has precedent on previous resolutions, specifically during jphgolf4321's term as President, however it is not clearly established whether it is legal to withdraw a resolution after it has been proposed, therefore I would like to litigate before the court to settle this issue and set a legal precedent.
Other parties: Ardyle, CaptainChimpy
Presiding Justice: Chief Justice cal76
Hearing Date: May 1, 2017
Decision:
The UC Court has decided in favor of the prosecution in principle, with some stipulations.
Whilst there is no current law attributed to the pulling and editing on legislation, it is unfair to do so without an approval of the cosponsors of the bill - or the President in the case of an exception - and is also unfair to anyone who may not check the wiki often, in any case that the changing of the Bill was not announced in Discord with the @everyone tag used.
So in response, the Court decides that Resolution 84 may carry on as is (as was the case with the old Bills, edited by members like jph and skele e.t.c.) until the voting period has concluded, as there is nothing the court can do to halt the progress of the Bill at this point. However, to work things out in the future, the Court proposes this resolution:
This is a constitutional amendment
In any such case where the author of a resolution, currently in the voting process, they must show the edited text to either their cosponsors, or any other member of the UC in the case where they may choose to use a different cosponsor (or the President in the case of an exemption). All the cosponsors (or President) must give their blessing for the resolution to be edited.
Furthermore, an edited resolution must have both the voting time and any votes reset, as if it was a brand new resolution. An announcement that the Resolution has been changed will then need to be announced somewhere in the UC Discord, using the @everyone tag.
Edits do not include simple spelling or grammar mistakes.
Case Closed: 2/5/2017 5:11am BST
Signed, Chief Justice
cal76
(\/) (°,,,°) (\/)
Majority: Chief Justice cal76
Dissent: None
Case #6
Filed: by KittyCat11231 on June 4th, 2017
Complaint: Ben6331, the former President of Ben Nation, has been banned, and therefore Ben Nation's leadership is in question. FoxFury1010 is the listed Vice President of Ben Nation, however EliteNeon has claimed ownership of Ben Nation. I request the court hear the case over Ben Nation's future in the United Cities, and issue a preliminary injunction, as allowed by Amendment 44, to suspend Ben Nation from voting in the General Assembly until the court's final decision is made. Respectfully, KittyCat11231 Attorney General of the United Cities
Other parties: EliteNeon
Presiding Justice: Chief Justice cal76
Preliminary Order: Ben Nation is barred from voting in the General Assembly - signed 4/6/2017 - 2:30am - BST
Hearing Date: None
Withdrawn: on June 5th, 2017
Case #7
Filed: by Verncow on 06/06/2017
Complaint: Ever since the UC was formed.. City States and States have no difference at all in terms of voting power and their presence in the UC, therefore, it isn't needed nor necessary that the UC to seperate the 2 .. Therefore, I request that the court decide to rule both entities as one with the same calling name.
Dismissed: on 07/06/2017
Reason for Dismissal: Chief Justice cal76, acting Associate Justice cal76 and Associate Justice Narnia17 have dismissed this case for the reasons that the issue of States/City States is merely a cosmetic one, which has no real impact on how the United Cities works. As such, the court should not be making decisions on such inconsequential matters. If it is a big issue to anyone, they have the right to introduce their own resolutions in the General Assembly to change it.
Signed, Chief Justice
cal76
(\/) (°,,,°) (\/)
Case #8
Filed: by KittyCat11231 on June 16, 2017
Complaint: This complaint is related to an irregularity in the voting procedure for Resolution 102. During the vote for the resolution, General Assembly member CaptainChimpy cast Nay votes on behalf of both AlikSong and BuiltPilot, without known evidence that either member consented to CaptainChimpy voting on their behalf. I request that the court compel CaptainChimpy to release evidence that both candidates consented to a Nay vote on their behalf, and that should CaptainChimpy fail to present such evidence, the Court order each vote to be null and void.
Hearing Date: Since the other justices have recused themselves, I will be hearing this case. Due to issues coordinating schedules between myself and parties involved in this case, it will be heard over correspondence. Both parties will have until noon CDT (5pm UTC) on June 18, the same time as the beginning of the GSM, to present their initial arguments in the Discord court TEXT channel. I will ask questions of both sides from there. As this is the first time we have heard a case in this way, I will remind all parties and spectators involved that order is to be maintained at all times during proceedings. Pueffie (talk) 04:04, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
Ruling: The plaintiff has rested his case, and defendant has announced leave of the United Cities, which the Court renders as a guilty plea in accordance with defendant's wishes. Therefore, I announce a default judgment in favor of the plaintiff. The NAY votes registered on behalf of AlikSong and BuildPilot for resolution 102, confirming hvt2011 as Vice President of the United Cities, are hereby null and void, and Ardyle's NAY vote, being found as legitimate, has been reinstated, bringing the resolution's final count to twenty-three votes in the affirmative, nine in the negative.
In the future, the Court advises any member voting in the proxy of another member that screenshot evidence be posted to the Discord law department channel, certifying the proxy vote is in accordance with the desires of the absentee, in accordance with Resolution 105, the Proof of Voting Act.
Case 8 is hereby closed. Pueffie (talk) 18:28, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
Case #9
Filed: by KittyCat11231 on July 25th 2017
Complaint:
With regards to CaptainChimpy's membership in the United Cities. CaptainChimpy left the United Cities on June 18th, and while he has since rejoined the Discord server, he has not added himself to the official membership list of the United Cities. I would like the Court to settle the issue of whether CaptainChimpy has been a legal member of the United Cities, and by extension, whether his vote in the United Cities election is valid. I request the Court issue a preliminary injunction enjoining the Electoral Commission from certifying the result of the July 2017 election until this case is resolved.
Preliminary Order:
Whilst this case is underway, the election results should not be displayed in order to help keep CaptainChimpy's vote anonymous and to not reveal a false election result in case the result of this case may change that. Because of that, I file an order that the results announcement must be delayed until the case has concluded. Polls will close at normal times.
Signed, Chief Justice
cal76
(\/) (°,,,°) (\/)
Withdrawn: on July 24, 2017
Case #10
Filed: by _Kastle on August 9th 2017
Complaint:
The fourth paragraph of Amendment Twenty to the United Cities Constitution states, "If any officer fails to join the MRT Server or vote on a United Cities resolution for 15 days, they shall be marked inactive and have their powers stripped. The powers of such office shall be given to another person who shall be entitled “Acting [Officer].” If this occurs to the President, the Acting President shall be given to the Vice President, but if the Vice President is inactive, it follows the line of succession. If this occurs to any other officer, the President shall choose someone to execute the powers without needing approval of the General Assembly." I would like the court to note the usage of the coordinating conjunction, defined in the Merriam Webster dictionary as "—used as a function word to indicate an alternative. This definition entails that the occurrence of either alternative, failure to vote on a resolution or failure to join the server, shall constitute officer inactivity. Therefore, I hereby request that the officeholder of the position of Secretary of State, AlikSong, be marked inactive and have his powers stripped, as he has not voted on a resolution since the fourteenth of July, in the year two thousand seventeen. His last voting occurrence may be inspected here: [[1]]. In accordance with Amendment Twenty, I recommend said powers be reinstated until such a time as Aliksong either rejoins the server or votes on a resolution, as said amendment states, "If an officer returns after having his power stripped by voting on a United Cities Resolution or joining the MRT Minecraft Server, then he/she shall receive his powers back from the person acting in his/her office."
Other parties:: KittyCat11231, Skelezomperman, MinecraftYoshi26
Ruling:
I would firstly like to thank all parties involved for your great patience in this case after such a long delay, and I would like to apologise on behalf of the UC Court for the delays in proceedings. After reading my your statements I have come to my conclusion. The UC Court finds in favour of the defence, Secretary of State AlikSong, represented by Attorney General KittyCat11231. The argument presented the prosecution infers that the amendment is read as so: If any officer fails to join the MRT Server or fails to vote on a United Cities resolution for 15 days, they shall be marked inactive and have their powers stripped. However, both the amendment is in fact written: If any officer fails to join the MRT Server or vote on a United Cities resolution for 15 days, they shall be marked inactive and have their powers stripped. I would like to stress the addition of 'Fails to join... or fails to vote' in the prosecution's reading of the amendment. Both in context and in the way it is written it is clear that the amendment is stating that the officer should be marked inactive if they fail to do X or Y, NOT fail to do X or fail to do Y. The Secretary of State has logged onto the Minecraft server within the last 15 days, therefore the court rules that he should not be marked inactive.
2/9/2017 5:25 BST I declare Case #10 Closed Signed, Chief Justice Jian_Zen
Case #11
Filed: by Attorney General KittyCat11231 on 10/16/2017
Complaint: EliteNeon, representative for United Cities member state the City-State of Shadowpoint, has declaimed ownership of the cities of Shadowpoint and Risma, both presumed to have been under the jurisdiction of the City-State of Shadowpoint, however he has not withdrawn the City-State of Shadowpoint as a member state in the United Cities. Article 1.1 of the Constitution details the membership requirements of the United Cities, including the requirement that member states which are below the Councillor rank may only obtain Observer status in the United Cities. As the City-State of Shadowpoint no longer has jurisdiction over any Councillor or higher level towns, as a state it is legally below the Councillor rank, as determined by Article 1.1.3. Therefore, the City-State of Shadowpoint has lost its eligibility to maintain its current membership status as State and should be reclassified as an Observer.
The Department of Law moves for the Court to issue a preliminary injunction, as authorized by Amendment 44, to suspend the City-State of Shadowpoint's full membership rights, including the right to vote in the General Assembly, pending further hearing of this case or the voluntary reduction of membership status by the City-State of Shadowpoint. This complaint will be withdrawn by the Attorney General should the City-State of Shadowpoint voluntarily reduce its status to Observer or exit the United Cities prior to this case being heard before the Court.
Preliminary Ruling: As an Associate Justice of the United Cities Court, I have issued an preliminary injunction suspending the City-State of Shadowpoint's membership privileges while the court reviews this case. Per amendment 44, this order shall expire on October 17 at 7:55 PM CDT. Ryan (talk) 01:06, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
This injunction has been extended after a unanimous vote amongst the justices and will now expire on October 18 at 7:55PM CDT. Ryan (talk) 23:21, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
This injunction has been extended after a unanimous vote amongst the justices and will now expire on October 19 at 7:55PM CDT. Ryan (talk) 00:39, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
Hearing Date: October 17, 2017 at 10PM EDT Ryan (talk) 02:46, 17 October 2017 (UTC) Not all Parties Present
Withdrawn: Attorney General KittyCat11231 withdrew the case on 10/20/17.
Case #12
Filed: by Mercury203 on 10/17/2017
Complaint: I have acquired the town of Rifle today, and tried to change my status to State. Attorney General Kittycat11231 has settled this case with no authority do so saying "I am the attorney general for fuck sake It isnt my fault you don’t understand how the UC works There is no ambiguity in the rules". I am asking that th Court issue a preliminary injunction blocking any resolution that changes the existing definition, which is: "States have all the same rights as City-States. The chief difference between a State and a City-State is that States commonly consist of multiple cities governed by the same Mayor. Also unlike City-States, the rank of a State is determined by the highest ranking city that is part of the State. Examples of States include the Lacledic Republic, the City-State of Kitania, and the United Republic of Sealane". I am also moving for a recognition of [Member]s and up to hold State designations with multipule towns. This complaint will be withdrawn should I acquire Rismia. Thank you for hearing my case.
Edit: Jph has recused himself, and my injunction request has been withdrawn. Ryanfr will be handling the case.
Preliminary Ruling: I have granted the states request for a preliminary injunction barring Mercury from voting on any and all resolutions. This order shall expire on October 18th at 2PM CDT. Ryan (talk) 23:25, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
Hearing Date: October 17, 2017 at 8:30PM EDT
Ruling: This evening the court convened to hear Case #12. Mercury203 is suing the United Cities alleging that because he acquired the town of Rifle on top of his other town, he was to be considered a state. In his complaint, he stated that “unlike City-States, the rank of a State is determined by the highest ranking city that is part of the State.” Per this, Mercury203, who is currently at the [Member] rank with neither of his towns holding a town rank (i.e. councillor, mayor, etc.), "State" would be ranked [Member], which is the rank of his highest town. Per Article 1.1, a member must be ranked [Councillor] or above to hold a rank higher than Observer in the United Cities. Therefore, it is the opinion of the court that Mercury203 shall be considered an Observer in the United Cities and entitled to any and all benefits that accompany that membership designation. The preliminary injunction that I issued earlier is now revoked as Observers may not vote in General Assembly resolutions. Mercury203 may vote in the current election and the court encourages said player to become a full-fledged member once he attains the rank of [Councillor] for his member state.
Case Closed Ryan (talk) 02:13, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
Appeal Filed: by Mercury203 on 10/18/2017
Appeal Complaint: There is a problem with Ryan's verdict that I would like to point out. Take a look at this statement: "Per Article 1.1, a member must be ranked [Councillor] or above to hold a rank higher than Observer in the United Cities." clearly is not supported by the actual text, of which there is an ambiguity. This means that Ryan's verdict has no meaning, and I would like this case appealed to an en banc court.
Hearing Date for Appeal: October 18, 2017 at 10PM EDT
Appeal Ruling: This evening the court convened to hear an appeal to Case #12. This case was ruled in the favor of the United Cities represented by Attorney General Kittycat11231 by Associate Justice ryanfr on October 17, 2017. After the issuance of the ruling, the plaintiff, mercury203 elected to appeal his case en banc. Acting Chief Justice jphgolf4321 recused himself, therefore the court moved to the next active officer willing to hear the case, President camelfantasy. The appeal was heard by Acting Acting Chief Justice camelfantasy, who was present in an administrative capacity, Associate Justice ryanfr, and Association Justice cal76. In a unanimous ruling between the Associate Justices, the court of the United Cities has upheld the original ruling of Associate Justice ryanfr. The plaintiff, mercury203, based his argument on the fact that amendment 65 of the United Cities was unconstitutional because it did not repeal amendment 27, more commonly known as the Bill of Rights. This is simply not the case. As the defendant stated, any constitutional amendment issued supersedes a previous one. The plaintiff also cited section 8 of the Bill of Rights which states and I quote “The United Cities shall take no action, executive or legislative, to restrict any of the aforementioned rights granted to the members of the United Cities. Any enacted resolution or portion of an enacted resolution in conflict with this amendment is hereby unconstitutional.” The plaintiff argued that amendment 65 violated this clause which is simply not true. Section 8 states that “Any enacted resolution or portion of an enacted resolution in conflict with this amendment is hereby unconstitutional. Amendment 65 is a constitutional amendment and was proposed as a constitutional amendment in the resolution form and not a enacted resolution as the plaintiff is arguing. Furthermore, the defendant cited Amendment 22 which stated that when a resolution altering the constitution is proposed, it must be labeled as an “Amendment.” To repeat what is stated above, Resolution 144, now Amendment 65 was proposed as a constitutional amendment.
Signed,
Associate Justice ryanfr Ryan (talk) 03:34, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
Associate Justice cal76
(\/) (°,,,°) (\/)
Case #13
Filed: by Mercury203 on 10/18/2017
Complaint: This is a splinter case to #12. Currently, I believe that resolution #144 is unconstitutional because it amends user rights without amending the bill or rights. I ask for a preliminary injunction preventing this resolution becoming law until 8 AM EDT tomorrow. Mercury203 (talk) 11:41, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
Dismissed: 10/18/2017
Reason for Dismissal: Acting Chief Justice jphgolf4321, Associate Justice ryanfr, and Associate Justice cal76 have dismissed this case on the grounds that it is nonsensical and would have been a waste of the court’s time to carry out.
Case #14
Filed: by Ryanfr on 12/12/2017
Complaint: Looking for a justice to confirm that the wiki is now accessible so voting times can be updated. Per Frumples message in announcements.
Hearing Date: 12/12/2017 by correspondence
Presiding Justice: Chief Justice KittyCat11231
Ruling: This Court certifies that the MRT wiki, for legal purposes defined by Amendment 79, was inaccessible for editing earlier today, and that the time period for General Assembly voting, tiebreaker voting, and Presidential voting on any currently proposed resolution was halted. These time periods will now resume, and the time limit for each is to be rounded up to the nearest 24 hours as of the issuance of this ruling.
It is so ordered,
KittyCat11231
Chief Justice of the United Cities
Case #15
Filed: by Attorney General mine_man_ on 1/13/2018
Complaint: I am filing this complaint in concordance of Amendment 79 in regards to the downtime caused by OVH's network at approximately 7:20am GMT + 0:00. Because of this downtime, no mrt services except discord could be accessed by members of the United Cities, including the wiki. In regards to this, I am requesting the United Cities Court rounds the voting period for Resolution 195 to 1/15/2018 @ 5:22AM GMT.
Hearing Date: 1/13/2018
Presiding Justice: Chief Justice KittyCat11231
Ruling: The Court has determined that the wiki was inaccessible for editing, for the purposes defined by Amendment 79, in the early morning of Saturday, January 13th EST. The Attorney General has presented evidence from the status page of OVH, the company which hosts the physical server the MRT runs on, including the wiki, which suggests that issues were present between 5:33 and 5:51 AM GMT. The effect this had on MRT services was evidenced by messages sent in the #staff-emergency channel of the MRT Discord server, in which megascatterbomb reports connections to the server and Mumble had "dropped", which Frumple confirmed was caused by a network issue. As the wiki is hosted alongside Mumble and the Minecraft server by OVH on the same physical machine, any network issue with OVH which affects the MRT can be expected to impact all of these services. The Attorney General was able to provide a statement to the Court from hvt2011, who stated that he attempted to access the wiki and was unable to do so, confirming that this network issue did affect the wiki. This evidence is enough for the Court to make the determination that the wiki was inaccessible for editing.
Amendment 79 to the Constitution declares that any General Assembly voting timer for a resolution is to be suspended should the wiki be deemed inaccessible for editing, and delegates responsibility to the Court to certify the existence of such inaccessibility, as well as to certify when the wiki is no longer inaccessible. Upon the certification that the wiki is once again accessible, all General Assembly voting timers for ongoing resolutions are to be rounded up to the nearest 24 hours from the time of the Court's determination. In accordance with these provisions, the Court certifies that the wiki is once again accessible for editing, and that the General Assembly voting timer for Resolution 195 is to be reset to an additional 24 hours of voting from the time this ruling was issued.
It is so ordered,
KittyCat11231
Chief Justice of the United Cities
Case #16
Filed: by ryanfr on 1/20/2018
Complaint: Per amendment 79, I am filing this case, hereby referenced as Case 16, seeking for the court to verify that the MRT wiki is inaccessible for editing, as evident by a message from MRT administrator Aliksong in the Minecart Rapid Transit Discord Server.
Hearing Date: 1/20/2018 by correspondence
Presiding Justice: Chief Justice KittyCat11231
Ruling: The Court certifies, as per Amendment 79, that the wiki is currently inaccessible for editing. Therefore, the timer for the General Assembly voting periods for Resolutions 205 and 206 are be halted, and will be reset to 24 hours time upon further decision of this Court. The timer for the Presidential voting period for Resolution 204 is halted, and will be rounded up to the next multiple of 24 hours upon further decision of this Court.
It is so ordered,
KittyCat11231
Chief Justice of the United Cities
Case #17
Filed: by Deputy Attorney General Skelezomperman on 1/20/2018
Complaint: Case 17 seeks to verify that BryanDairyRd was banned as an administrative precaution. This is supported by evidence of his wiki account being banned with the reason "Alternate Account of Mercury203," who is a previously banned member, and his Minecraft acccount being banned for the same reason.
Hearing Date: 1/20/2018 by correspondence
Presiding Justice: Chief Justice KittyCat11231
Ruling: The Court certifies that BryanDairyRd has received an administrative ban by the MRT administration. Therefore, as per Amendment 77, BryanDairyRd and his state Saint Petersburg forfeit membership in the United Cities as an Observer state.
It is so ordered,
KittyCat11231
Chief Justice of the United Cities
Case #18
Filed: by Deputy Attorney General Skelezomperman on 1/20/2018
Complaint: Case 18 seeks to declare that the Wiki is accessible for editing again. We also seek that the timers for Resolutions 204, 205, and 206 are reset to be rounded up to the next 24 hours under the Downtime Act.
Hearing Date: 1/20/2018 by correspondence
Presiding Justice: Chief Justice KittyCat11231
Ruling: The Court certifies, as per Amendment 79, that the wiki, having previously been declared inaccessible for editing by this Court, is now accessible for editing. Amendment 79 states that time remaining for any General Assembly voting periods, as well as the period for the President to approve or veto resolutions, are to be increased, rounded up to the nearest multiple of 24 hours.
The General Assembly voting period for Resolution 205 was scheduled to close prior to the wiki being certified as inaccessible. However, Amendment 7 of the Constitution states that if the wiki is not updated to reflect the end of voting, "any additional votes will be counted until voting for that council [the General Assembly] is closed and sent to the next council [the President] for voting". Therefore, General Assembly voting on a resolution is not considered to have ended until the wiki is updated to reflect it as such, and General Assembly voting for Resolution 205 remained open at the time the wiki was certified inaccessible. As such, the General Assembly voting period for Resolution 205 must be ordered reset by this Court.
The Court orders that the time limit for the General Assembly voting periods for Resolutions 205 and 206 will hereby end 24 hours following the issuance of this decision, and the time limit for the Presidential voting period for Resolution 204 will hereby end 72 hours following the issuance of this decision.
It is so ordered,
KittyCat11231
Chief Justice of the United Cities
Case #19
Filed: by Deputy Attorney General Skelezomperman on 1/23/2018
Complaint: On behalf of the Department of Law, I officially file Case 19, seeking to declare the MRT Wiki inaccessible starting at 1700 UTC, as announced by Frumple yesterday.
Hearing Date: None
Withdrawn: on 1/23/2018
Case #20
Filed: by Narnia17 on 1/23/2018
Complaint: On behalf of the General Assembly I officially file Case 20, seeking to declare the MRT Wiki inaccessible starting at 1700 UTC, as announced by Frumple yesterday.
Hearing Date: 1/23/2018 by correspondence
Presiding Justice: Chief Justice KittyCat11231
Ruling: The Court certifies, as per Amendment 79, that the wiki is currently inaccessible for editing. Therefore, the timer for the General Assembly voting period for Resolution 207 is hereby paused, and will be reset to 24 hours time upon further decision of this Court.
It is so ordered,
KittyCat11231
Chief Justice of the United Cities
Case #21
Filed: by ryanfr on 1/23/2018
Complaint: On behalf of the General Assembly, I am filing Case 21, seeking to declare that the wiki is accessible for editing again, and that the necessary timers be adjusted.
Hearing Date: 1/23/2018 by correspondence
Presiding Justice: Chief Justice KittyCat11231
Ruling: The Court certifies, as per Amendment 79, that the wiki, having previously been declared inaccessible for editing by this Court, is now accessible for editing. Amendment 79 states that the time remaining for any General Assembly voting periods, as well as the period for the President to approve or veto resolutions, are to be increased, rounded up to the nearest multiple of 24 hours. The Court orders that the time limit for the General Assembly voting period for Resolution 207 will hereby end 24 hours following the issuance of this decision.
It is so ordered,
KittyCat11231
Chief Justice of the United Cities
Case #22
Filed: by ryanfr on 4/2/2018
Complaint: Enacted Resolution 41, more commonly referred to as “The Legislative Committee Accountability Act,” outlines that monthly committee reports be submitted to the General Assembly 48 hours after midnight UTC on the 1st of each calendar month. Moreover, it says that “The monthly report should be sent to the #general-assembly channel in discord, their committee channel in discord and their committee page on the Minecart Rapid Transit Wiki.” The deadline for submitting the April 2018 report was at 8PM EDT / midnight UTC on April 2.
The only report submitted to the General Assembly was posted in the #announcements channel of the United Cities Discord on April 1 at 10:14PM EDT. The report was not posted in the #history channel nor posted on the History Committee Wiki page. Enacted Resolution 41 states that “failure to submit a monthly report in the way outlined by this resolution will result in the current committee chairman to be instantaneously removed from the committee and the trigger of an automatic motion internal to the committee to elect a new committee chairman.”
Therefore, being that the report was not submitted in the correct and lawful way as outlined in Enacted Resolution 41 and that the deadline to submit such report has passed, I am asking that the court confirm the removal of Skelezomperman as the History Committee Chair and that an internal motion be placed for a vote to elect a new committee chair.
Withdrawn: on 4/2/2018
Case #23
Filed: by KittyCat11231 on 5/3/2018
Complaint: On the morning of May 3rd, the wiki was temporarily inaccessible for editing. This is evidenced by mine_man_’s statement in the MRT Discord: "Because mercury got the password again, the wiki is currently unable to edit until the password is changed." As per Amendment 79, due to the wiki having been inaccessible for editing during the period of Presidential voting for Resolution 245, the timer for the President to sign or veto the resolution must be rounded up to the next multiple of 24 hours. I request that the Court certify the fact that the wiki was inaccessible for editing during the Presidential voting period for Resolution 245 and that the wiki is once again accessible for editing, and increase the remaining time left on the Presidential voting timer for Resolution 245 to the next multiple of 24 hours.
I also request a preliminary injunction to prevent the Presidential voting period from closing until the case is heard, unless the President signs or vetoes Resolution 245 or two non-Justice Officers make the certification of the wiki’s inaccessiblity and the timer reset before the case is heard.
This case will be withdrawn in the event the President signs or vetoes Resolution 245 or two non-Justice Officers make the certification of the wiki’s inaccessiblity and the timer reset before the case is heard.
Respectfully,
KittyCat11231
General Assembly Member
Withdrawn: on 5/3/2018
Case #24
Filed: by Skelezomperman on 5/13/2018
Complaint: I am writing to have the Court certify that in accordance with Amendments 77 and 82, SoSo123 has been banned from the MRT server as an administrative action. SoSo is currently a member state, owning Freedon. However, Frumple sent out a message on the MRT Discord last night stating that SoSo has been permanently banned for "repeated instances of disrespect and not understanding the consequences of his actions." In addition, SoSo has also been blocked permanently on the MRT Wiki.
I request that under Amendment 77, SoSo123 officially ceases to be a member of the United Cities as he is now permanently banned from the MRT server.
On behalf of the Department of Law,
Attorney General Skelezomperman
Hearing Date: 5/13/2018 by correspondence
Presiding Justice: Associate Justice KittyCat11231
Ruling: The Court hereby certifies that SoSo123 has been permanently banned from the server as an official administrative punishment, as defined by Amendment 82. Amendment 77, as amended by Amendment 82, states that, should a member of the United Cities be permanently banned as an official administrative punishment, that member immediately forfeits their membership in the United Cities. As such, the Court certifies that SoSo123’s state Freedon forfeited its membership in the United Cities upon his ban, and that it is no longer a member of the United Cities.
The Attorney General brought to concern the issue of town transfership after SoSo123’s ban. Amendment 76 governs the procedures for the transfership of United Cities membership when a member state or portion of a member state is transferred to another player. However, as SoSo123 immediately forfeited membership upon his ban, his state of Freedon was not a member of the United Cities at the time it was transferred to camelfantasy, and as such the procedures of Amendment 76 shall not apply in this case.
It is so ordered,
KittyCat11231
Associate Justice of the United Cities
Case #25
Filed: by Skelezomperman on 6/26/2018
Complaint: Resolutions 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, and 258 all have voting timers with no time zone marked (although presumably, it was done so in the Eastern Time Zone, UTC-4). However, Amendment 68 requires all voting timers to be filed in Coordinated Universal Time.
We do feel that all voting timers should be changed to the correct time in UTC. However, we also feel that votes should not be invalidated due to the fact that it has not affected the voting process yet as the 24-hour mark has not been reached for any of these resoluvtions.
On behalf of the Department of Law,
Attorney General Skelezomperman
Correction from Plaintiff: Upon further investigation, it seems that the timers were put in UTC, but it was not stated that this was in UTC. We still seek for timers to be put in UTC but that all votes remain validated.
Preliminary Injunction (effective until 6/28/2018 @ 12:52 PM GMT): The Court hereby issues the following preliminary injunction in response to Case #25 filed by Attorney General Skelezomperman. The Attorney General has complained to the Court that Resolutions 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, and 258 do not have voting timers marked with the time in Coordinated Universal Time that voting is scheduled to close, as required by Amendment 68. The authority of the Court to issue preliminary injunctions is granted by Amendment 44 and further regulated by Amendment 71, which places four requirements that all preliminary injunctions must satisfy. Those requirements are analyzed below.
The first requirement is that "the preliminary injunction seeks to prevent an action or event that may be reasonably seen as contrary to the Constitution and/or the laws of the United Cities". Amendment 68 declares, in no ambiguous terms, that "all voting timers for resolutions must be in Coordinated Universal Time (UTC)". Resolutions 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, and 258 have all been proposed without a voting timer marked with the time in Coordinated Universal Time. As such, the means of which the resolutions named above were proposed can be reasonably seen as contrary to the Constitution.
The second requirement is that "it is necessary to prevent such an action prior to the full hearing of the case in question due to the possibility of irreparable damage or an irreversible, significant, or impactful violation of the Constitution and/or the laws of the United Cities". Resolutions 252, 253, 254, 255, and 256 are proposed to confirm Presidential appointments of Electoral Commissioners, and their enactment would result in new officials with official powers assuming office, which, if the Court were to rule their confirmation invalid, would be a significant and impactful violation of the Constitution. Resolution 257 changes the procedure by which elections are conducted, and if such resolution were to be enacted and enforced, and later deemed invalidly passed by the Court, it would result in an impactful violation of the Constitution. Resolution 258 is entirely void of text, and as such would have no impact.
The third requirement is that "the plaintiff or plaintiffs in the case in question have a likely chance of succeeding in their case when it is heard before the United Cities Court". The Attorney General presents a clear argument that the proposals of Resolutions 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, and 258 are in direct violation of a specific provision of Amendment 68, and therefore has a likely chance of success when the case is heard in full.
The fourth requirement is that "the preliminary injunction does not violate other Articles or Amendments to this Constitution outside of the extent authorized by this Amendment necessary to enforce the clauses listed above". The preliminary injunction issued by this Court suspends the enactment of resolutions proposed to the General Assembly after the legally required 24 hours of voting, but only insofar as it prevents the violation of Amendment 68 of the Constitution, and as such is authorized by Amendment 71, and therefore is constitutional and valid.
Thereby, the Court orders that, while this preliminary injunction remains effective, the General Assembly voting periods for Resolutions 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, and 257 shall not be closed, and all votes shall continue to be counted, until this case has been heard by the Court, or until 24 hours after the voting timer is validly reset by the proposer of the resolution in accordance with Amendment 68. During this time, the resolutions may not be signed or vetoed by the President, no tiebreaker votes may be issued, and no attempt to enforce the named resolutions shall be permitted. The above terms shall not apply to Resolution 258, as the preliminary injunction does not pass the second requirement listed by Amendment 71 insofar as it applies to Resolution 258. Any person who shall willfully violate or attempt to obstruct the enforcement of this preliminary injunction shall be in contempt of the United Cities Court and subject to a Court Citation as per the terms of Amendment 74.
It is so ordered,
KittyCat11231
Associate Justice of the United Cities
Amendment to complaint: Resolution 257 shall now be excluded from the complaint as it has been fixed. In addition, we are also asking for clarification on the status of Resolution 258, as it has no text currently, and ask that if the correct text is posted for it, that all voting be reset for Resolution 258.
On behalf of the Department of Law,
Attorney General Skelezomperman
Amendment #2 to Complaint: Resolution 258 shall now be excluded from the complaint as it has been withdrawn and then reproposed by Narnia17 correctly.
On behalf of the Department of Law,
Attorney General Skelezomperman
Case #26
Filed: by Skelezomperman on 6/27/2018
Complaint: This case is filed as a response to the permanent ban of CaptLincoln from the MRT server by Frumple. This was clearly a permanent ban "as an administrative punishment" as this was in response to a rant that CaptLincoln had delivered on the UC Discord server. The Department of Law asks that the Court in accordance with Amendments 77 and 82 certifies that this was an administrative punishment and that CaptLincoln has vacated his membership in the United Cities. We also ask that it is certified that under the precedent of Case 24, MaRT City's membership in the United Cities is not transferred under the provisions of Amendment 76 due to the city having immediately vacated its membership upon CaptLincoln's ban.
On behalf of the Department of Law,
Attorney General Skelezomperman
Hearing Date: 6/27/2018 by correspondence
Presiding Justice: Associate Justice KittyCat11231
Ruling: The Court hereby certifies that CaptLincoln has been permanently banned from the server as an official administrative punishment, as defined by Amendment 82. Amendment 77, as amended by Amendment 82, states that, should a member of the United Cities be permanently banned as an official administrative punishment, that member immediately forfeits their membership in the United Cities. As such, the Court certifies that CaptLincoln's state MaRT City forfeited its membership in the United Cities upon his ban, and that it is no longer a member of the United Cities.
As per the precedent set by this Court in Case #24, the procedures of Amendment 76 shall not apply regarding the membership of MaRT City following the transfer of ownership as MaRT ceased to be a member state of the United Cities immediately upon CaptLincoln's ban, and therefore was not a member state when transferred to its new owner.
It is so ordered,
KittyCat11231
Associate Justice of the United Cities
Case #27
Filed: by Skelezomperman on 7/24/2018
Complaint: This case is filed in accordance with the procedures outlined in Amendments 77 and 82. We ask that the Court certifies that PtldKnight has been temporarily banned from the MRT server until July 31, 2018, and that he is officially demoted to Observer until that time.
On behalf of the Department of Law,
Attorney General Skelezomperman
Hearing Date: 7/24/2018 by correspondence
Presiding Justice: Associate Justice KittyCat11231
Ruling: The Court hereby certifies that PtldKnight has been temporarily banned from the server as an official administrative punishment, as defined by Amendment 82. Amendment 77, as amended by Amendment 82, states that, should a member of the United Cities be temporarily banned as an official administrative punishment, that member immediately shall be demoted to Observer status in the United Cities. Under normal circumstances, this would result in PtldKnight's state of Waterville being restricted to Observer status. However, the state of Waterville has been transferred by PtldKnight to Skelezomperman, who represents the member state of Mons Pratus. As such, under Amendment 76, Waterville is to be considered under the jurisdiction of Mons Pratus and therefore ceases to be a member of the United Cities.
It is so ordered,
KittyCat11231
Associate Justice of the United Cities