(08-09-2020, 08:30 AM)Tsunamy Wrote:

(08-09-2020, 12:58 AM)Nat Wrote:

Acknowledging Volaworand's amicus curiae brief, I would appreciate it if the Election Commissioner and the Local Council (collectively or individually) could voluntarily answer the following questions through a post below at their earliest convenience:

1. Who made the decision to limit voting in the Local Council elections to native WA residents? On what basis did they make this decision?
   
2. Is having a native WA nation in the region a requirement to be considered a member of the Coalition under Article III of the Charter? (cf. HCLQ 1708 Members of the Coalition)
   
3. If not, how does limiting the vote accord with Article III, Section 4 of the Charter? (i.e. 'No member may be denied the right to vote or hold office, unless prohibited by constitutional law.')
   

While the deadline for filing amicus curiae briefs remains the same (i.e. there are approximately 24 hours to do so), answers to the above questions by Local Councillors or the Election Commissioner may be accepted outside this window. This is in acknowledgement of the fact that these questions have been posted late in the window for the filing of briefs.

Regardless, prohibiting people from participating and them choosing not to are totally different issues. If someone chooses to have their WA nation in Balder, but 35 puppets in TSP, must we allow all 35 puppets to vote? The person isn't being denied the right to participate — they could freely move their WA nation to TSP for the duration of the election — but they are choosing not to. 

Except I'm not choosing to have my WA elsewhere due to opposite loyalties - I'm doing it because I'm on a military operation to liberate embassy allies. 
Currently, the civilian militia is 40 or so strong from TSP - had the civilian militia organizing happened a week earlier, that would be 40 or so people who couldn't vote.