KingChris Posted July 22, 2010 Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 [quote name='graniteknight' date='21 July 2010 - 10:59 PM' timestamp='1279771148' post='2383971'] OOC: you mean hearing... [/quote] OOC: A hearing is a legal proceeding. A holding is an action made by a court, in this case affirming or reversing the laws quoted above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AironthFlamewing Posted July 22, 2010 Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 (edited) OOC: never heard that term before IC: We condemn Nico Crook's claims to Tahoean Land and also call for the repeal of the unconstitutional anti tahoe measures Edited July 22, 2010 by graniteknight Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted July 22, 2010 Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 (edited) [quote name='KingChris' date='21 July 2010 - 10:56 PM' timestamp='1279770983' post='2383969'] "Senator Michaels (or Callahan), the laws that your state refers to in an attempt to strike down this resolution may be unconstitutional, in which case your argument is nullified. Therefore, seeing that the voting pattern in this chamber has a likely chance of being affected by such a Supreme Court decision, I request that the Senate allows the Supreme Court to form a holding on this case before it proceeds." [/quote] "May be unconstitutional, but are not yet. You cannot make a law or disqualify an argument based on a hypothetical court ruling that may or may not be happening in the future. As soon as it is ruled Constitutional or unconstitutional, the argument will change with the legal definition. Further, the Senate does not control the Supreme Court and the proposal is already on the floor. We cannot stop it now. What you [b]can[/b] do is vote against the proposal, then wait for the Supreme Court to make a ruling, and then make a more "legitimate" vote based on the later Supreme Court ruling." OOC: Your lack of understanding of the american system disturbs me [quote name='graniteknight' date='21 July 2010 - 11:06 PM' timestamp='1279771598' post='2383981'] OOC: never heard that term before IC: We condemn Nico Crook's claims to Tahoean Land and also call for the repeal of the unconstitutional anti tahoe measures [/quote] "I do not know who Nico Crook is, or why he is claiming the Tahoan land; nor do I understand how the Senate is supposed to repeal state laws that are allowed so long as the Supreme Court does not strike it down." OOC: jesus, you guys Edited July 22, 2010 by Sargun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AironthFlamewing Posted July 22, 2010 Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 OOC: STFU sargun... IC: Our point is that the Supreme Court MUST be brought into the situation, Remember sir, Federal trumps State Government, let us ask for the Supreme Court to review the law Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted July 22, 2010 Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 Senator Callahan facepalmed at the idiocy being displayed. OOC: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bull Run Posted July 22, 2010 Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 [quote name='graniteknight' date='21 July 2010 - 09:06 PM' timestamp='1279771598' post='2383981'] OOC: never heard that term before IC: We condemn Nico Crook's claims to Tahoean Land and also call for the repeal of the unconstitutional anti tahoe measures [/quote] We find ourselves completely aligned with the condemnation alleged by Senator Read. By the current maesures, we of Virginia have identified an open assult on the Tahoean culture with state admission. Let not admission into this union also mean the systematic destruction of historical traditions, cultures, and ways of life. Our greatness thus far has been derived by our diversity; we can exist as a "melting pot of the world" or so be counted amongst the many imperialist powers who have stained recent history on this continent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Enema Posted July 22, 2010 Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 (edited) edited... need to mind my manners a bit. Edited July 22, 2010 by Tidy Bowl Man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AironthFlamewing Posted July 22, 2010 Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 Read stood then and coughed "We agree strongly with our colleague from Virginia and we call for a vote of the Senate to decide the matter at hand" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Vortex Posted July 22, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 (edited) ic: The United States supreme court when pressed to rule by lawyers on whether or not the laws of the states in the Tahoan merger violate constitutional law had this to say. [quote] It is in the opinion of the Supreme Court that the laws set aside by the former States of South Tahoe are in fact unconstitutional and in violation of the first amendment. That said, the Supreme court by a vote of 8 of 9.. strikes down these laws. It has also reviewed the articles of annexation of Southern Tahoe. We find that these articles, protecting these specific laws in these states.. may also be unconstitutional. However before striking the matter down, we are waiting to see how the former states of South Tahoe wish to react to our ruling. If they wish to regain their domestic sovereignty because we cannot respect these laws, then we shall also strike down the annexation completely.. re-liberating them. What is clear is that the First Amendment respects the rights to these displays. If they had remained a foreign power they would still be able to retain these laws. We think perhaps the congress did not explore the magnitude of the incompatibilities when accepting South Tahoan annexation in full enough detail. They have to accept our laws, especially the Constitution, over-ride theirs if they wish to remain in the Union. Joseph Scoleri, Chief Justice of the United States [/quote] ooc: Sorry Sargun, I thought long and hard about it.. and it's just what would happen. Edited July 22, 2010 by Maelstrom Vortex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunther Posted July 22, 2010 Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 From this point forward, please refrain from using the word, "Tahoe". As far as I am concerned, there is no nation named "Tahoe" nor was there ever a nation named Tahoe. It does not exist; never has. If someone wishes to address the lands of the States of the United States please discuss the states that are in existence. I believe those states are named California, Arizona, Utah, Nevada and Colorado. The people of those states can decide for themselves who will govern them through a fair and elected democratic process. Please retain civility in your discussion, gentlemen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Vortex Posted July 22, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 "The Senator from New Jersey makes a good point. Please refer to the senators from the South West U.S. by their proper designations." VP Johnson observed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Milley Posted July 22, 2010 Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 (edited) "The States of the South West have already voted for liberty once. If they votes were true, they will vote the same thing. Hold the elections in the South West." - Federalist Alaskan Senator Micheal Scott Edited July 22, 2010 by Ryan Milley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AironthFlamewing Posted July 22, 2010 Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 We concur with our friends from Alaska and New Jersey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted July 22, 2010 Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 "The Western States have agreed to the measures and will, after a six-month transition period, remove the laws. With that out of the way, I simply have this to say: you have shown yourselves incapable of making your own decisions. You let other countries force you into passing bills and acting on their behalf. For that, I am certain that these polls will not hold the same. I almost hope they do not simply to show you that if you do not have the spine to stand up to those who would take your liberties away, you deserve to lose." Senator Callahan sighed and voiced his support for the measure to happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AironthFlamewing Posted July 22, 2010 Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 The Union in the long run is what needs to be preserved, end the petty squabbling and the infighting. We must stand strong as a Union, the personal and professional costs are irrelevant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted July 22, 2010 Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 "Nobody here has talked about personal of professional costs. In fact, I'm not even sure what you're talking about right now. Just what the hell are you smoking, Senator?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AironthFlamewing Posted July 22, 2010 Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 (edited) The elderly Senator from Delaware put his head in his hands and sighed, "Senator Callahan, you donkey, I have served this office of Senator from Delaware longer then you have been alive and you cannot see the fact that your grandstanding and obvious bias towards Nico Crooks and his false regime of this Tahoe place, you seem to have forgotten your duty to the United States comes first and foremost, and your obvious support of this rebel Crooks is a danger to us all as a nation and as a collective body also. United We Stand or Divided We Fall. Edited July 22, 2010 by graniteknight Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted July 22, 2010 Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 "...what? Not a single word of your little speech makes any sense. Delaware has existed for only a few years, and as I am well into my forties I'm wondering whether or not you need to be checked for dementia. Further, what false regime? I intensely dislike the Tahoe Republic, and so does Nico Crooks. Further, my duty comes to the people of my [b]state[/b] first, the people that I represent. Even more, this vote may very well cause all of the Western states to leave the United States simply because you are intent on slandering them and acting as if they are not Americans as well! Finally, it is quite evident by your inflammatory language that you are intent on slandering Nico Crooks simply because he is running for President and soundly beating your own candidate - and I urge you to put aside your personal bias and think about what I am saying. If you love America, why are you pushing a bill that will only serve to weaken her?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AironthFlamewing Posted July 22, 2010 Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 This bill preserves the Union in the most judicious and fair manner that could be agreed upon... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingChris Posted July 22, 2010 Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 "I stand by my fellow Delawarean senator. This bill is indeed, in my opinion, an ugly bill, but since not passing this bill may escalate foreign relations with Tahoe even further and bring us closer to war with them, I support this bill. Of course, this is provided that the Tahoe Nationalist Party will not be involved in or support secessionist activity." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AironthFlamewing Posted July 22, 2010 Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 OOC: chris who be you? what state? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingChris Posted July 22, 2010 Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 OOC: Texas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AironthFlamewing Posted July 22, 2010 Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 OOC: Should have guessed with the Cornyn reference.... IC: Tahoe if it rejoins using the democratic process that seems so eagerly denied to it by outside parties, cannot secede from the Union Senator, they would be prevented from doing so by the Constitution Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingChris Posted July 22, 2010 Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 IC: "I have no idea what you're talking about. The states that formerly comprised Southern Tahoe are already part of the union. This bill states that Tahoe will hold special elections to determine its representation in Congress, with the Tahoe Nationalist Party. What I was saying is that I support the bill if the Tahoe party won't be involved in or support secessionist activity." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AironthFlamewing Posted July 22, 2010 Report Share Posted July 22, 2010 IC: There is still contention about whether the regions in question legally and properly joined the United States... if they are found to have done so properly then all parties and all peoples of those states should have a vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.