Akeboun v. Moxie: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
m (Categorizing) |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|color=green | |color=green | ||
|title=Akeboun v. Moxie | |title=Akeboun v. Moxie | ||
|image1=[[File:Coat of Arms of Cascadia.png| | |image1=[[File:Coat of Arms of Cascadia.png|100px]] | ||
|tribunalname=[[Supreme Court of Cascadia]] | |tribunalname=[[Supreme Court of Cascadia]] | ||
|filed=May 1, 2023 | |filed=May 1, 2023 | ||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
|concurrence1=WrestlingWithGod | |concurrence1=WrestlingWithGod | ||
|concurrence2=Aurivia | |concurrence2=Aurivia | ||
|lawsapplied=Pub.L. 4-1; Nat. Const. art. I | |lawsapplied=[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ftnmqp_sQ1xTG0l0l4WZe4EE-5A9MZLIjKdOy406bUs/edit Pub.L. 4-1]; [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yMHbF3_LMXcxvepi-jmDul4orlqx-p0gL7CoHxMf2oc/edit?usp=sharing Nat. Const. art. I] | ||
}}'''''Akeboun v. Moxies_hoe''''', 26 CSC. 523 (2023/5), was a landmark decision of the [[Supreme Court of Cascadia]] in which the Court upheld the Anti-Discrimination Act and extended its coverage to also include protection from discrimination based off of political opinion. | }}'''''Akeboun v. Moxies_hoe''''', 26 CSC. 523 (2023/5), was a landmark decision of the [[Supreme Court of Cascadia]] in which the Court upheld the ruling in ''[[Cascadia v. AllStarPro90]]'' (2023/3) regarding the coverage of the Anti-Discrimination Act and extended its coverage to also include protection from discrimination based off of political opinion.<br> | ||
The case arose from a lawsuit filed by then-House Speaker Akeboun against the private individual Moxies_hoe. Following Akeboun's introduction of a proposal in the House of Representatives to file articles of impeachment against then-President AghastBlock, former representatives Moxies_hoe reacted with the emojis "KYS", an acronym for "Kill yourself". The lawsuit was initiated by Akeboun as a redress of grievance and emotional damage due to Moxie's comment. Specifically, he claimed that under the Anti-Discrimination Act, whose periphery was upheld by ''Cascadia v. AllStarPro90'' (2023/3), the Anti-Discrimination Act was being violated by Moxie due to its ban on discrimination against a specific group or view, in this case a political group or view in opposition to President AghastBlock.<br> | |||
Moxie was represented in court by Public Advocate SayerQT who first argued that, due to precedent set in ''AllStarPro'', the Anti-Discrimination Act was to be enforced by a criminal prosecution and conviction, with damages being paid to the state, not to individual actors. The defense argued that Akeboun filing a civil trial for damages fell outside of the periphery of the ''AllStar'' ruling and thus requested a mistrial. The court rejected the request for a mistrial, and proceedings went on as planned.<br> | |||
The court, in a unanimous 3-0 decision, ruled in favor of Akeboun, with the majority opinion being written by Associate Justice Beamz30. The court held that while the Anti-Discrimination Act limited free speech, it is a necessary limit on free speech that had been upheld by precedent in rulings such as the aforementioned ''AllStar''. 50% of the fine to the state was granted to Akeboun for reparatory damages. Chief Justice WrestlingWithGod's concurring opinion detailed his wish for the House of Representatives to consider repealing the Anti-Discrimination due to its restrictions on freedom of speech and cluttering of the justice system, and for precedent to be set to deal with this on a Discord TOS basis rather than by law. The Anti-Discrimination Act was repealed less than a month after this ruling, leaving the precedent of Chief Justice wrestling's concurring opinion regarding Discord TOS's role in the moderation process of freedom remaining as court precedent. | |||
[[Category:Miscellaneous]] | |||
Latest revision as of 18:08, 29 October 2023
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Akeboun v. Moxies_hoe, 26 CSC. 523 (2023/5), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of Cascadia in which the Court upheld the ruling in Cascadia v. AllStarPro90 (2023/3) regarding the coverage of the Anti-Discrimination Act and extended its coverage to also include protection from discrimination based off of political opinion.
The case arose from a lawsuit filed by then-House Speaker Akeboun against the private individual Moxies_hoe. Following Akeboun's introduction of a proposal in the House of Representatives to file articles of impeachment against then-President AghastBlock, former representatives Moxies_hoe reacted with the emojis "KYS", an acronym for "Kill yourself". The lawsuit was initiated by Akeboun as a redress of grievance and emotional damage due to Moxie's comment. Specifically, he claimed that under the Anti-Discrimination Act, whose periphery was upheld by Cascadia v. AllStarPro90 (2023/3), the Anti-Discrimination Act was being violated by Moxie due to its ban on discrimination against a specific group or view, in this case a political group or view in opposition to President AghastBlock.
Moxie was represented in court by Public Advocate SayerQT who first argued that, due to precedent set in AllStarPro, the Anti-Discrimination Act was to be enforced by a criminal prosecution and conviction, with damages being paid to the state, not to individual actors. The defense argued that Akeboun filing a civil trial for damages fell outside of the periphery of the AllStar ruling and thus requested a mistrial. The court rejected the request for a mistrial, and proceedings went on as planned.
The court, in a unanimous 3-0 decision, ruled in favor of Akeboun, with the majority opinion being written by Associate Justice Beamz30. The court held that while the Anti-Discrimination Act limited free speech, it is a necessary limit on free speech that had been upheld by precedent in rulings such as the aforementioned AllStar. 50% of the fine to the state was granted to Akeboun for reparatory damages. Chief Justice WrestlingWithGod's concurring opinion detailed his wish for the House of Representatives to consider repealing the Anti-Discrimination due to its restrictions on freedom of speech and cluttering of the justice system, and for precedent to be set to deal with this on a Discord TOS basis rather than by law. The Anti-Discrimination Act was repealed less than a month after this ruling, leaving the precedent of Chief Justice wrestling's concurring opinion regarding Discord TOS's role in the moderation process of freedom remaining as court precedent.