1 USAGS 6: Lustig v. Wachob
3 posters
Page 1 of 1
Re: 1 USAGS 6: Lustig v. Wachob
In defense of myself:
Without the existence of state governments these states were functioning in anarchy. There was no political difference between them, and they existed purely for tradition's sake. In this particular case, and in no future cases, it was necessary to quickly eliminate states so a fair election process could occur. The states were incapable of accepting a merger because they did not have governors. Ex-poofter Lustig is probably suing this because he is racist against the people of Mandaloria and does not wish to associate with them. But the issue is not the obvious prejudice and hatred within the cold, black heart of the ex-poofter, it is the current necessity for a single state so that all people may have access to elections and seats within government.
When the institutions of government are so clearly flawed, the standard procedure is also inherently flawed and therefore must be circumvented to stimulate actual progress and meaningful change.
Without the existence of state governments these states were functioning in anarchy. There was no political difference between them, and they existed purely for tradition's sake. In this particular case, and in no future cases, it was necessary to quickly eliminate states so a fair election process could occur. The states were incapable of accepting a merger because they did not have governors. Ex-poofter Lustig is probably suing this because he is racist against the people of Mandaloria and does not wish to associate with them. But the issue is not the obvious prejudice and hatred within the cold, black heart of the ex-poofter, it is the current necessity for a single state so that all people may have access to elections and seats within government.
When the institutions of government are so clearly flawed, the standard procedure is also inherently flawed and therefore must be circumvented to stimulate actual progress and meaningful change.
J-Mads- Posts : 1024
Join date : 2009-07-31
Age : 33
Location : Your mother's a whore
Re: 1 USAGS 6: Lustig v. Wachob
Due to the lack of an argument, and its lame appearance in court, the Court deigns to not hear the case, cause the court don't do lame.
AgentW- Posts : 917
Join date : 2009-05-26
Location : Mandalore
Re: 1 USAGS 6: Lustig v. Wachob
After further review, the Court declares the Executive Order 0007 to be UNCONSTITUTIONAL. States are a matter of America, and how can decisions be left to the states if there are none? Federalism would have failed. Instead the states in the simulation shall be the ones that are currently represented, namely, Wisconsin, Virginia, New York, and any others there may be or may be in the future.
AgentW- Posts : 917
Join date : 2009-05-26
Location : Mandalore
Re: 1 USAGS 6: Lustig v. Wachob
I did. The main thing I noticed was that for several laws, people said, this is a decision for the states, and how can the states decide if they don't exist? As a continuation of the previous argument for the reason of dismissal, the states shall not count in congress, meaning the nation is one congressional district, but shall apply for all other statehood functions.
AgentW- Posts : 917
Join date : 2009-05-26
Location : Mandalore
Re: 1 USAGS 6: Lustig v. Wachob
So let me get this straight. States exist, but the rules regarding states in Congress and the Presidency are void. In other words, states are not represented in Congress?
Similar topics
» 1 USAGS 7: Wachob v. Lustig
» CR1- Lustig can suck it; Wachob (LAW)
» 1 USAGS 9: Wachob v. Epp
» 1 USAGS 8: Wachob v. Sensenbrenner
» 1 USAGS 14: Wachob v. Hanna
» CR1- Lustig can suck it; Wachob (LAW)
» 1 USAGS 9: Wachob v. Epp
» 1 USAGS 8: Wachob v. Sensenbrenner
» 1 USAGS 14: Wachob v. Hanna
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum