The East PacificBoard

President Hollen's decision to invite the alcatus leaders to the Household of the Republic has recieved a flurry of responses from all sides of the debate. With the visit slated take place a week from now, tension has risen both within and outside the Federal government over this topic.

On one hand, Hollen's own party is passively supporting the meeting. Few leaders have spoken of it beyond the chambers of Congress. As far as the Commonwealth Party is concerned, the quicker the alcatus are out of Easunistan's new lands, the better. It is up to Hollen to ensure the process is peaceful.

However, the Humanitarian Party is experiencing ripples in its unity in response. A clear line has been drawn between those who've (begrudingly) accepted the diplomatic visit and those who've condemned it. A fact which has been shown by the latter's rise in fervor to sue Hollen's administration.

In the case of Walczyk v. Easunistan, the Supreme Court ruled that Amendment Fifteen -- which prohibits Nonites from becoming Easunian citizens and taking residece in the country-- does not restrict Nonites from touring the country, so long as they return home after an ample amount of time.

A controversial case, the most recent example of its relevancy was after the outbreak of war in Mustva, when tourists from the country became stranded in Easunistan and were subsequently interned.

Then, the Hollen administration and Commonwealth Party argued that the action was constitutional under Walczyk v. Easunistan. That the ruling granted them time to find another nation to take in the refugees while they stayed interned.

However, the Humanitarian Party's stance was that the nature of the case and the Supreme Court's language in the ruling meant it only granted tourism privileges to Nonites. That no power was granted to the Federal government to keep them in the country as refugees, and they needed to be removed immediately once their time expired.

Despite the tension in Congress at the time, ultimately it led nowhere and the refugees left without issue. Yet, the strong emotions it stirred are finally coming full circle as both sides repeat the same talking points over the current matter at hand.

Outside of the Federal government, the divide has reached citizens too. While southerners are mostly disinterested so long as the new lands are assimilated without bloodshed, a notable number of northerners are up in arms as it will be their states the alcatus will have to cross through. Consequently, protests have swept up the region which grows more agitated with each of the President's actions.

Listening to the pleas of their people, all four northern governors have expressed staunch opposition to the constitutional legitimacy of the President's actions. They've even gone as far as having organized an event where they publically demanded the President's removal from office in front of a crowd of thousands.

Troublingly, when the Attorney General contacted them afterwards to speak to them, they gave only vague answers as to whether or not they would comply with the President. Similarly, law enforcement agencies in the north has failed to give a direct answer in regards to whether or not it'll enforce any order against the governors.

Quietly, a call has sounded for Hollen to prepare the Army National Guard for the upcoming day.

President Hollen's decision to invite the alcatus leaders to the Household of the Republic has recieved a flurry of responses from all sides of the debate. With the visit slated take place a week from now, tension has risen both within and outside the Federal government over this topic.

On one hand, Hollen's own party is passively supporting the meeting. Few leaders have spoken of it beyond the chambers of Congress. As far as the Commonwealth Party is concerned, the quicker the alcatus are out of Easunistan's new lands, the better. It is up to Hollen to ensure the process is peaceful.

However, the Humanitarian Party is experiencing ripples in its unity in response. A clear line has been drawn between those who've (begrudingly) accepted the diplomatic visit and those who've condemned it. A fact which has been shown by the latter's rise in fervor to sue Hollen's administration.

In the case of Walczyk v. Easunistan, the Supreme Court ruled that Amendment Fifteen -- which prohibits Nonites from becoming Easunian citizens and taking residece in the country-- does not restrict Nonites from touring the country, so long as they return home after an ample amount of time.

A controversial case, the most recent example of its relevancy was after the outbreak of war in Mustva, when tourists from the country became stranded in Easunistan and were subsequently interned.

Then, the Hollen administration and Commonwealth Party argued that the action was constitutional under Walczyk v. Easunistan. That the ruling granted them time to find another nation to take in the refugees while they stayed interned.

However, the Humanitarian Party's stance was that the nature of the case and the Supreme Court's language in the ruling meant it only granted tourism privileges to Nonites. That no power was granted to the Federal government to keep them in the country as refugees, and they needed to be removed immediately once their time expired.

Despite the tension in Congress at the time, ultimately it led nowhere and the refugees left without issue. Yet, the strong emotions it stirred are finally coming full circle as both sides repeat the same talking points over the current matter at hand.

Outside of the Federal government, the divide has reached citizens too. While southerners are mostly disinterested so long as the new lands are assimilated without bloodshed, a notable number of northerners are up in arms as it will be their states the alcatus will have to cross through. Consequently, protests have swept up the region which grows more agitated with each of the President's actions.

Listening to the pleas of their people, all four northern governors have expressed staunch opposition to the constitutional legitimacy of the President's actions. They've even gone as far as having organized an event where they publically demanded the President's removal from office in front of a crowd of thousands.

Troublingly, when the Attorney General contacted them afterwards to speak to them, they gave only vague answers as to whether or not they would comply with the President. Similarly, law enforcement agencies in the north has failed to give a direct answer in regards to whether or not it'll enforce any order against the governors.

Quietly, a call has sounded for Hollen to prepare the Army National Guard for the upcoming day.

President Hollen's decision to invite the alcatus leaders to the Household of the Republic has recieved a flurry of responses from all sides of the debate. With the visit slated take place a week from now, tension has risen both within and outside the Federal government over this topic.

On one hand, Hollen's own party is passively supporting the meeting. Few leaders have spoken of it beyond the chambers of Congress. As far as the Commonwealth Party is concerned, the quicker the alcatus are out of Easunistan's new lands, the better. It is up to Hollen to ensure the process is peaceful.

However, the Humanitarian Party is experiencing ripples in its unity in response. A clear line has been drawn between those who've (begrudingly) accepted the diplomatic visit and those who've condemned it. A fact which has been shown by the latter's rise in fervor to sue Hollen's administration.

In the case of Walczyk v. Easunistan, the Supreme Court ruled that Amendment Fifteen -- which prohibits Nonites from becoming Easunian citizens and taking residece in the country-- does not restrict Nonites from touring the country, so long as they return home after an ample amount of time.

A controversial case, the most recent example of its relevancy was after the outbreak of war in Mustva, when tourists from the country became stranded in Easunistan and were subsequently interned.

Then, the Hollen administration and Commonwealth Party argued that the action was constitutional under Walczyk v. Easunistan. That the ruling granted them time to find another nation to take in the refugees while they stayed interned.

However, the Humanitarian Party's stance was that the nature of the case and the Supreme Court's language in the ruling meant it only granted tourism privileges to Nonites. That no power was granted to the Federal government to keep them in the country as refugees, and they needed to be removed immediately once their time expired.

Despite the tension in Congress at the time, ultimately it led nowhere and the refugees left without issue. Yet, the strong emotions it stirred are finally coming full circle as both sides repeat the same talking points over the current matter at hand.

Outside of the Federal government, the divide has reached citizens too. While southerners are mostly disinterested so long as the new lands are assimilated without bloodshed, a notable number of northerners are up in arms as it will be their states the alcatus will have to cross through. Consequently, protests have swept up the region which grows more agitated with each of the President's actions.

Listening to the pleas of their people, all four northern governors have expressed staunch opposition to the constitutional legitimacy of the President's actions. They've even gone as far as having organized an event where they publically demanded the President's removal from office in front of a crowd of thousands.

Troublingly, when the Attorney General contacted them afterwards to speak to them, they gave only vague answers as to whether or not they would comply with the President. Similarly, law enforcement agencies in the north has failed to give a direct answer in regards to whether or not it'll enforce any order against the governors.

Quietly, a call has sounded for Hollen to prepare the Army National Guard for the upcoming day.