Archelit_
Citizen
Homeland Security Department
Commerce Department
Health Department
Archelit
Recruit
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2026
- Messages
- 39
- Thread Author
- #1
Case Filing
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION
Archelit
Plaintiff
v.
Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant
COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:
WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF
2. The Defendant is the Commonwealth of Redmont, acting by and through its Department of State, the executive body statutorily responsible for the administration of petitions and the initiation of official referendums.
2. The petition concerned matters of corporate taxation and government debt, issues of significant public interest to the citizenry of the Commonwealth.
3. Pursuant to Section 3(2) of the Petition Act, once a petition accrues thirty (30) signatures via the designated AYE reaction mechanism, the Department of State is "lawfully required to make an official referendum on the topic."
4. The Plaintiff's petition successfully surpassed the statutory threshold, achieving forty-one (41) AYE reactions, as evidenced by the attached screenshot.
5. Despite unequivocally meeting and exceeding the thirty-signature threshold, the Department of State has failed, refused, and neglected to declare the petition in the #government-announcements channel and has failed to initiate the mandatory official referendum.
6. The Defendant's inaction has persisted for an unreasonable period, constituting a direct, ongoing, and unexcused violation of a codified law of the Commonwealth.
7. The Plaintiff engaged with the civic processes of the Commonwealth in good faith, relying upon the statutory protections guaranteed by the Petition Act. The Defendant's arbitrary refusal to uphold the law has caused the Plaintiff severe frustration, psychological distress, and a profound diminution of their enjoyment of participation and citizenship within the Commonwealth.
8. A reasonable person, having fulfilled all legal prerequisites for a petition only to be met with governmental defiance of the law, would inevitably experience a loss of enjoyment of citizenship and a worsening of conditions, as their statutory rights have been rendered illusory by the Defendant's inaction.
2. Writ of Mandamus: The Plaintiff possesses a clear legal right to the initiation of the referendum process. The Defendant possesses a clear, codified legal duty to initiate said process. There exists no other adequate remedy at law to compel the Department of State to execute its statutory obligations. A Writ of Mandamus is the appropriate remedy where a government entity fails to perform a mandatory, non-discretionary duty owed to a citizen.
3. Consequential Damages for Loss of Enjoyment and Worsening of Conditions: Under Part III, Section 5 of the Redmont Civil Code Act (Source: Act of Congress - Redmont Civil Code Act), a plaintiff is entitled to consequential damages for "Loss of Enjoyment" and "Worsening of Conditions," provided it is proven on the balance of probabilities that a reasonable person in the plaintiff's position would experience the same type of damage. The Defendant's unlawful dereliction of duty has directly resulted in a measurable degradation of the Plaintiff's experience of citizenship, and the Plaintiff claims $15,000 in consequential damages, representing a reasonable and proportionate valuation of the non-pecuniary harm suffered.
4. Jurisdiction: This Court possesses proper subject-matter jurisdiction over this dispute pursuant to the Judicial Jurisdiction Amendment Act (Source: https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/judicial-jurisdiction-amendment-act.6584/), as this matter involves a civil action of significant legal importance against the Government wherein the Defendant has breached a codified statutory duty.
1. Immediate issuance of a Writ of Mandamus compelling the Department of State to declare the Plaintiff's petition in the #government-announcements channel and formally initiate the official referendum process without further delay or prejudice.
2. An award of consequential damages in the amount of $15,000 to compensate the Plaintiff for the proven personal loss, specifically encompassing Loss of Enjoyment and Worsening of Conditions as defined by Part III, Section 5 of the Redmont Civil Code Act.
3. Declaratory relief affirming that the Department of State's failure to act upon a petition exceeding thirty AYE reactions constitutes an unlawful breach of the Petition Act.
4. Such other and further relief as this Court deems just, equitable, and proper under the laws of the Commonwealth of Redmont.
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.
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 21st day of June 2026
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION
Archelit
Plaintiff
v.
Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant
COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:
WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF
I. PARTIES
1. The Plaintiff is Archelit (Discord: username_dead), a recognized citizen of the Commonwealth of Redmont who has suffered direct, non-pecuniary personal harm as a proximate result of the Defendant's unlawful inaction.2. The Defendant is the Commonwealth of Redmont, acting by and through its Department of State, the executive body statutorily responsible for the administration of petitions and the initiation of official referendums.
II. FACTS
1. On 21 June 2026, at approximately 06:09, the Plaintiff lawfully submitted a formal petition in the designated #petitions channel on the official DemocracyCraft Discord server, strictly adhering to all procedural requirements set forth by the Petition Act (Source: Repealed - Petition Act).2. The petition concerned matters of corporate taxation and government debt, issues of significant public interest to the citizenry of the Commonwealth.
3. Pursuant to Section 3(2) of the Petition Act, once a petition accrues thirty (30) signatures via the designated AYE reaction mechanism, the Department of State is "lawfully required to make an official referendum on the topic."
4. The Plaintiff's petition successfully surpassed the statutory threshold, achieving forty-one (41) AYE reactions, as evidenced by the attached screenshot.
5. Despite unequivocally meeting and exceeding the thirty-signature threshold, the Department of State has failed, refused, and neglected to declare the petition in the #government-announcements channel and has failed to initiate the mandatory official referendum.
6. The Defendant's inaction has persisted for an unreasonable period, constituting a direct, ongoing, and unexcused violation of a codified law of the Commonwealth.
7. The Plaintiff engaged with the civic processes of the Commonwealth in good faith, relying upon the statutory protections guaranteed by the Petition Act. The Defendant's arbitrary refusal to uphold the law has caused the Plaintiff severe frustration, psychological distress, and a profound diminution of their enjoyment of participation and citizenship within the Commonwealth.
8. A reasonable person, having fulfilled all legal prerequisites for a petition only to be met with governmental defiance of the law, would inevitably experience a loss of enjoyment of citizenship and a worsening of conditions, as their statutory rights have been rendered illusory by the Defendant's inaction.
III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. Breach of Statutory Duty (Violation of the Petition Act): Section 3(2) of the Petition Act (Source: Repealed - Petition Act) establishes a mandatory, non-discretionary legal duty upon the Department of State. The statutory phrasing "lawfully required" denotes a strict ministerial obligation, stripping the Department of State of any discretionary authority to delay, ignore, or refuse to process a petition once the thirty-AYE threshold is satisfied. By failing to declare the petition and initiate the referendum, the Defendant is in direct violation of this codified law.2. Writ of Mandamus: The Plaintiff possesses a clear legal right to the initiation of the referendum process. The Defendant possesses a clear, codified legal duty to initiate said process. There exists no other adequate remedy at law to compel the Department of State to execute its statutory obligations. A Writ of Mandamus is the appropriate remedy where a government entity fails to perform a mandatory, non-discretionary duty owed to a citizen.
3. Consequential Damages for Loss of Enjoyment and Worsening of Conditions: Under Part III, Section 5 of the Redmont Civil Code Act (Source: Act of Congress - Redmont Civil Code Act), a plaintiff is entitled to consequential damages for "Loss of Enjoyment" and "Worsening of Conditions," provided it is proven on the balance of probabilities that a reasonable person in the plaintiff's position would experience the same type of damage. The Defendant's unlawful dereliction of duty has directly resulted in a measurable degradation of the Plaintiff's experience of citizenship, and the Plaintiff claims $15,000 in consequential damages, representing a reasonable and proportionate valuation of the non-pecuniary harm suffered.
4. Jurisdiction: This Court possesses proper subject-matter jurisdiction over this dispute pursuant to the Judicial Jurisdiction Amendment Act (Source: https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/judicial-jurisdiction-amendment-act.6584/), as this matter involves a civil action of significant legal importance against the Government wherein the Defendant has breached a codified statutory duty.
IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:1. Immediate issuance of a Writ of Mandamus compelling the Department of State to declare the Plaintiff's petition in the #government-announcements channel and formally initiate the official referendum process without further delay or prejudice.
2. An award of consequential damages in the amount of $15,000 to compensate the Plaintiff for the proven personal loss, specifically encompassing Loss of Enjoyment and Worsening of Conditions as defined by Part III, Section 5 of the Redmont Civil Code Act.
3. Declaratory relief affirming that the Department of State's failure to act upon a petition exceeding thirty AYE reactions constitutes an unlawful breach of the Petition Act.
4. Such other and further relief as this Court deems just, equitable, and proper under the laws of the Commonwealth of Redmont.
V. Witnesses
None at this time. The Plaintiff reserves the right to call witnesses as the proceedings require.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.
VI. Evidence
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 21st day of June 2026