Akeboun v. Moxie: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
|argument=[https://tickettool.xyz/direct?url=https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1058546274795802724/1107388537826988083/transcript-ticket-0026.html Argument] | |argument=[https://tickettool.xyz/direct?url=https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1058546274795802724/1107388537826988083/transcript-ticket-0026.html Argument] | ||
|decision=[https://discord.com/channels/966171948520464444/1058611384608374854/1107383028558340178 Decision] | |decision=[https://discord.com/channels/966171948520464444/1058611384608374854/1107383028558340178 Decision] | ||
|relatedcases=''[[ | |relatedcases=''[[The People v. AllStarPro90]]'' | ||
|holding=The ruling in | |holding=The ruling in The People v. AllStarPro90 is upheld and the Anti-Discrimination Act's coverage is extended to political opinion, with Moxies_hoe being fined 130g; however with the court recommending for the Anti-Discrimination Act to be repealed and for the precedent of the court's jurisprudence to be based on Discord Terms of Service. | ||
|headjudgetitle=Chief Justice | |headjudgetitle=Chief Justice | ||
|headjudge=WrestlingWithGod | |headjudge=WrestlingWithGod | ||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
|concurrence2=Aurivia | |concurrence2=Aurivia | ||
|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] | |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 ruling in ''[[ | }}'''''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 ''[[The People 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 '' | 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 ''The People 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> | 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> | ||