Lawsuit: Dismissed Poemhunter & xLayzur Plaintiff v The Commonwealth of Redmont Defendant

Status
Not open for further replies.

Poemhunter

Citizen
Redmont Bar Assoc.
Supporter
Oakridge Resident
poemhunter
poemhunter
attorney
Joined
Mar 9, 2021
Messages
85
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT CIVIL ACTION

Poemhunter & xLayzur Plaintiff

v.

The Commonwealth of Redmont Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

Certain aspects of our Government should be separate from the President and their Administration. The Constitution defines this as an Executive Office, however it does not actually define which Departments are Executive Offices.

The Department of State should be impartial because it manages elections, which could be politically influenced by the President. The Department of Legal Affairs should be impartial because they may have to prosecute the President. The Department of Education should be impartial because they take a front line role with the education new players and could be politically influenced by the President to their advantage. The Department of Justice must lawfully execute the laws and ensure the good order of the server, which could be politically influenced by the President - especially if they have to arrest them.

I. PARTIES
1. Poemhunter
2. The Commonwealth of Redmont
3. xLayzur

II. FACTS
1. The Constitution defines an Executive Office as:

“Executive Officers are members of the cabinet who each lead executive offices, it is the Executive Officer's responsibility to oversee the efficient operations of their office and to create and amend office policy in conjunction with the Government's direction. They appoint and dismiss employees of their respective departments.

Executive Offices and Officers are required to remain unbiased, impartial and are required to defend the constitution and the laws of the commonwealth over the will of the current administration and president.”

2. The Constitution does not define which Departments are Executive Offices and which are Departments.

3. The Department of State, The Department of Legal Affairs, The Department of Justice, and The Department of Education would all be defined as Executive Offices due to the fact that they should be unburned by the political aspirations of the current administration.

4. The Constitution defines the role of the Vice President as: “The Vice President is second to the President and acts as their sole adviser.”

5. Derpy has been nominated to head the Department of Education.

6. Here is a graphic that outlines how each department is directly affected by the definition of Executive Offices:

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. The Constitution implies that the President can run a Department, however they clearly cannot run an Executive Office by virtue of it needing to be independent from the current administration.

2. The Department of Education, as an Executive Office, cannot be headed by Derpy while they are Vice President due to the fact that an Executive Office must be independent from the administration.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. The Court affirms that the Department of State, Department of Legal Affairs, Department of Education, & Department of Justice are Executive Offices.

2. The Court does not allow the sitting President or Vice President to run either the Department of State, Department of Legal Affairs, Department of Education, & Department of Justice as they are Executive Offices.

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 13 day of November 2022
 

Attachments

  • case.png
    case.png
    300.1 KB · Views: 64
EMERGENCY INJUNCTION
I am requesting an emergency injunction as Vice President Derpy has cast a tie breaking vote to affirm themself as Secretary of Education. I am requesting that Vice President Derpy be temporarily removed from the role of Secretary of Education until such a time as it is determined if it is legal to be Vice President and Secretary of Education as the Department of Education is an Executive Office, due to the requirement of an Executive Office being impartial from the Administration having the Vice President be Secretary would cause untold damage.

MOTION TO MOVE TO THE SUPREME COURT
As this case would now result in the removal of Vice President Derpy as Secretary of Education I move that it be moved to the Supreme Court.
 
At the request of the Plaintiff, I will be moving this case to the Supreme Court.
 
The Supreme Court has voted to not hear this case in the first instance. This case deals with the possibility of a vice president serving as a secretary within certain departments, however, does not call for the actual removal of any secretary.
Under Section 19 of the Redmont Constitution, "Only‌ ‌the‌ ‌Supreme‌ ‌Court‌ ‌shall‌ ‌hear‌ ‌cases‌ ‌that‌ ‌would‌ ‌remove‌ ‌a‌ ‌person/persons‌ ‌from‌ ‌the‌ ‌following‌ ‌positions:‌ ‌Representatives,‌ ‌Secretary,‌ ‌Senator,‌ ‌Judge,‌ ‌Vice-President,‌ ‌Principal‌ Officers,‌ ‌General‌ ‌Advisors,‌ ‌President, Executive Officers." Since this is dealing with the Constitutionality of the position, and not calling for the direct removal of the secretary, the Federal Court will have original jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court thanks the plaintiff for their time.
 
I withdraw this Lawsuit from the Federal court.
 
At the request of the Plaintiff, I am dismissing this lawsuit without prejudice.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top