- Joined
- Jul 5, 2021
- Messages
- 322
- Thread Author
- #1
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION
Spectre Industries (The Lovely Law Firm representing)
Plaintiff
v.
Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant
COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows: The Fair Campaigning Act, as currently written, contains unconstitutional provisions that interfere with the constitutional right to freedom of speech and freedom of political expression.
WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF
I. PARTIES
1. Spectre Industries (Plaintiff)
2. Commonwealth of Redmont (Defendant)
II. FACTS
1. On May 28th 2021, ant<3 (a member of the Department of Justice) issued a warning to Chakselsn for violating Law 15.25
2. Chakselsn had made an announcement in the announcements channel of the company he owns, Spectre Industries, that endorsed political candidates in an upcoming election.
3. According to ant<3, this endorsement violated Law 15.25 because it was campaigning in a non-politics channel/server related to DemocracyCraft.
III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. Under Section IV (Rights & Freedoms) of the Constitution of Redmont, Sub-Section VI entitles citizens to "Freedom of Political Communication".
2. Section 7 of the Fair Campaigning Act, which established Law 15.25, makes it illegal to campaign to players with less than 4 hours of playtime, to players on the "Do Not Contact" list, and to campaign in a non-politics channel or server related to DemocracyCraft.
3. Section 7 is clearly unconstitutional. The Constitution guarantees the right to freedom of political communication, and yet Section 7 is severely inhibiting that freedom.
4. Section 7 makes it a crime to campaign to people with less than 4 hours of playtime, but this is a severe and undue burden on freedom of political communication. It is a heavy burden because it requires campaigners to check the playtime of each and every single person they campaign to. Furthermore, even in the fully legal #politics channels of servers, those channels are usually public anyways which would mean that players with less than 4 hours of playtime are still being campaigned to. That seems like the law is contradicting itself and being confusing. Furthermore, this 4 hour rule is highly arbitrary. Under this rule, it is somehow acceptable to campaign to someone with 5 hours playtime, but not 3 hours, even though neither of those players are allowed to vote due to the constitutionally required 12 hours playtime to vote.
5. Section 7 also makes it a crime to campaign to people on the "Do Not Contact" list. This is again a severe and undue burden on the constitutional right to political communication, because campaigners have to check for each person whether or not they are on the list. Again, it is likely that the fully legal #politics channels, which are usually public and visible to all, have people on the "Do Not Contact" list getting those messages. This is contradictory and confusing.
6. Section 7 finally makes it a crime to campaign to people in non-politics channels or servers. This in itself is a confusing contradiction. What if there is a politics channel in an overall non-political server? Is campaigning there legal? Who/what determines whether or not a channel or server is political? Section 7 is too vague here and poses a danger to the rule of law, since there can be no rule of law without clearly written laws. Even legalized politics channels, since they are public, are probably sending messages to people on the "Do Not Contact" list, which is yet another contradiction.
IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. The Fair Campaigning Act and Law 15.25 should be struck down and declared unconstitutional. That Act (especially Section 7) and Law 15.25 create a heavy, unnecessary, and confusing burden on the constitutional right to political speech.
2. A written public apology from the Department of Justice to Spectre Industries and its CEO Chakselsn, for the wrongful warning issued for violating this unconstitutional law.
Attached evidence: Screenshots of the warning issued to Chakselsn
By making this submission, I agree I understand the penalties of lying in court and the fact that I am subject to perjury should I knowingly make a false statement in court.
DATED: This 8th day of August 2021
CIVIL ACTION
Spectre Industries (The Lovely Law Firm representing)
Plaintiff
v.
Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant
COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows: The Fair Campaigning Act, as currently written, contains unconstitutional provisions that interfere with the constitutional right to freedom of speech and freedom of political expression.
WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF
I. PARTIES
1. Spectre Industries (Plaintiff)
2. Commonwealth of Redmont (Defendant)
II. FACTS
1. On May 28th 2021, ant<3 (a member of the Department of Justice) issued a warning to Chakselsn for violating Law 15.25
2. Chakselsn had made an announcement in the announcements channel of the company he owns, Spectre Industries, that endorsed political candidates in an upcoming election.
3. According to ant<3, this endorsement violated Law 15.25 because it was campaigning in a non-politics channel/server related to DemocracyCraft.
III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. Under Section IV (Rights & Freedoms) of the Constitution of Redmont, Sub-Section VI entitles citizens to "Freedom of Political Communication".
2. Section 7 of the Fair Campaigning Act, which established Law 15.25, makes it illegal to campaign to players with less than 4 hours of playtime, to players on the "Do Not Contact" list, and to campaign in a non-politics channel or server related to DemocracyCraft.
3. Section 7 is clearly unconstitutional. The Constitution guarantees the right to freedom of political communication, and yet Section 7 is severely inhibiting that freedom.
4. Section 7 makes it a crime to campaign to people with less than 4 hours of playtime, but this is a severe and undue burden on freedom of political communication. It is a heavy burden because it requires campaigners to check the playtime of each and every single person they campaign to. Furthermore, even in the fully legal #politics channels of servers, those channels are usually public anyways which would mean that players with less than 4 hours of playtime are still being campaigned to. That seems like the law is contradicting itself and being confusing. Furthermore, this 4 hour rule is highly arbitrary. Under this rule, it is somehow acceptable to campaign to someone with 5 hours playtime, but not 3 hours, even though neither of those players are allowed to vote due to the constitutionally required 12 hours playtime to vote.
5. Section 7 also makes it a crime to campaign to people on the "Do Not Contact" list. This is again a severe and undue burden on the constitutional right to political communication, because campaigners have to check for each person whether or not they are on the list. Again, it is likely that the fully legal #politics channels, which are usually public and visible to all, have people on the "Do Not Contact" list getting those messages. This is contradictory and confusing.
6. Section 7 finally makes it a crime to campaign to people in non-politics channels or servers. This in itself is a confusing contradiction. What if there is a politics channel in an overall non-political server? Is campaigning there legal? Who/what determines whether or not a channel or server is political? Section 7 is too vague here and poses a danger to the rule of law, since there can be no rule of law without clearly written laws. Even legalized politics channels, since they are public, are probably sending messages to people on the "Do Not Contact" list, which is yet another contradiction.
IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. The Fair Campaigning Act and Law 15.25 should be struck down and declared unconstitutional. That Act (especially Section 7) and Law 15.25 create a heavy, unnecessary, and confusing burden on the constitutional right to political speech.
2. A written public apology from the Department of Justice to Spectre Industries and its CEO Chakselsn, for the wrongful warning issued for violating this unconstitutional law.
Attached evidence: Screenshots of the warning issued to Chakselsn
By making this submission, I agree I understand the penalties of lying in court and the fact that I am subject to perjury should I knowingly make a false statement in court.
DATED: This 8th day of August 2021
Attachments
Last edited:
