Case: Adjourned The Executive of Andorn vs. The House of Representatives of Andorn: SCA 001

[SumoMC]

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF ANDORN


The Executive of the Republic of Andorn,
Plaintiff,


v.


The House of Representatives of the Republic of Andorn,
Defendant.


Case No. SCA 001
Date of Filing: May 29, 2025
Judge: Unseatedduke1, CJ

---

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF​

---

JURISDICTION, VENUE, AND ADMINISTRATIVE PREREQUISITES​

This Honorable Court has original jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to Article III of the Constitution of the Republic of Andorn, which vests the Supreme Court with the authority to adjudicate disputes between coequal branches of government, including but not limited to the Executive and Legislative Branches.


Venue is proper before this Court as the matter presents a justiciable constitutional controversy arising from the official conduct of both the Executive and Legislative branches, affecting the fundamental separation of powers.


Plaintiff further asserts that emergency injunctive relief is both appropriate and necessary in light of Defendant’s asserted interpretation of the Constitution — namely, that a legislative override of a presidential veto requires renewed Executive consideration, rather than resulting in the enactment of the legislation into law.

---

THE PARTIES​

1. Plaintiff, the Executive of the Republic of Andorn, is represented herein by SumoMC in their official capacity as President of the Republic.
2. Defendant, the House of Representatives of the Republic of Andorn, is comprised of the members of the House of Representatives and the Speaker thereof.

---

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS​

1. On or about May 24, 2025, President SumoMC exercised constitutional veto authority with respect to a bill titled The Residency Act II of 2025, citing its failure to incorporate necessary constitutional amendments.
2. On or about May 28, 2025, the House of Representatives voted to override said veto.
3. Thereafter, the Speaker of the House, Maxterpiece, publicly declared that, pursuant to their interpretation of the governing constitutional framework, the bill, notwithstanding the override, must return to the Executive for renewed assent or veto.

---

CAUSE OF ACTION​

1. Plaintiff avers that the aforementioned interpretation of the Constitution by Defendant is erroneous and inconsistent with the intended legislative process as prescribed by the Constitution of the Republic of Andorn.
2. Specifically, Plaintiff contends that permitting a bill, once vetoed and subsequently overridden, to return to the Executive for further action would create a perpetual cycle of veto and override, thereby rendering the override provision ineffectual and undermining legislative finality.
3. Plaintiff further asserts that the Constitution, properly construed, mandates that a bill, once lawfully passed by both Chambers and vetoed but thereafter overridden by the requisite legislative majority, shall become law without further Executive involvement.

---

PRAYER FOR RELIEF​

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court grant the following relief:

1. Enter a declaratory judgment holding that, under the Constitution of the Republic of Andorn, a bill which has been vetoed by the Executive and thereafter overridden by the Congress shall become law without necessity of further Executive action;
2. Issue such further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

---

Respectfully submitted,
SumoMC
Counsel for Plaintiff,
Executive of the Republic of Andorn

 

[Unseatedduke1]

Writ of Summons​

@Maxterpiece is required to appear before the Supreme Court in the case of The Executive of Andorn vs. The House of Representatives of Andorn.

Failure to appear within 72 hours of this summons will result in a default judgment based on the known facts of the case.

Both parties should make themselves aware of the Court Rules and Procedures

 

[Maxterpiece]

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ANDORN
Answer to Complaint

---

JURISDICTION, VENUE, & ADMINISTRATIVE PREREQUISITES
The Defense will not contest the Prerequisites alleged by the Plaintiff


FACTUAL BACKGROUND
A. The Defense will not contest the factual background as presented by the Plaintiff

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
A. I feel it is my duty to this court, and to the people of Andorn to explain that I personally agree with plaintiffs interpretation of the Constitution. I, however, chose to carry out the specific actions I did out of fear of violating two points of the constitution:

1. Article 1, Section 4(3) - "All legislation passed by the Congress will be sent to the President for Assent or Veto, only once a law has received Presidential Assent will it become law." The ability/power to declare that something is law is rests solely with the executive. Under the constitution I, as speaker, have no authority/ability to declare that something is law. Which leads me to the second, and greater, reason for my actions

2. Article 2, section 6, subsection ii(6) - "[The house] Can not take power from other branches or give themselves power over others" In declaring that the Residency Act II of 2025 was law I feared it would set a precedent that would violate the aforementioned quote.


B. The defense agrees, and will not contest the hypothetical veto/override cycle as proposed by the plaintiff

C. The defense contests the idea that a bill "overridden by the requisite legislative majority, shall become law without further Executive involvement" on the grounds that it violates Article 1, Section 4(3) of the constitution.

D. Furthermore the defense asserts that any bill passed by veto override would be itself illegal as it had no Presidential Assent

PRAYER FOR RELIEF​

A. The defense respectfully urges this court to the following relief

1. Enter a declaratory judgment holding that, under the Constitution of the Republic of Andorn, a bill which has been vetoed by the Executive and thereafter overridden by the Congress shall return to the President, wherein the President is legally required to grant Assent, within a reasonable time frame decided by this court;
2. Issue such further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

Respectfully submitted,
Maxterpiece
Counsel for Defense,
The House of Representatives of the Republic of Andorn

 

[Unseatedduke1]

We will now enter the discovery phase, which will last for 72 hours. During this time, each party may submit interrogatory questions and present evidence.

 

[Maxterpiece]

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ANDORN

Motion for Summary Judgement

As both the Plaintiff and Defense agree in principle, and there are no material facts in dispute. The Defense sees no reason for a simple matter such as this to extend to a lengthy trial.

Respectfully Submitted
Maxterpiece
Counsel for the Defense,
The House of Representatives of the Republic of Andorn

 

[Unseatedduke1]

Does the plaintiff agree?

 

[SumoMC]

Does the plaintiff agree?

We do not, we wish to proceed to a trial.

 

[Unseatedduke1]

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ANDORN

Motion for Summary Judgement

As both the Plaintiff and Defense agree in principle, and there are no material facts in dispute. The Defense sees no reason for a simple matter such as this to extend to a lengthy trial.

Respectfully Submitted
Maxterpiece
Counsel for the Defense,
The House of Representatives of the Republic of Andorn

This motion is denied. Although mutual agreement is not required for summary judgment, in this instance, I prefer to proceed only if both parties consent. Discovery will still conclude at the scheduled time.

 

[Unseatedduke1]

With the discovery phase now concluded, we will proceed to opening statements. The plaintiff has 36 hours to submit their opening statement. Once submitted, the defense will have 36 hours from that time to file their own.

 

[The_Donuticus]

As President of the Republic of Andorn, the Executive now wishes for a speedy trial. The Executive now agrees to the motion for summary judgement.

 

[Unseatedduke1]

Court in Recess pending verdict.

 

[Unseatedduke1]

Verdict

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF ANDORN


Case No. SCA 001
The Executive of the Republic of Andorn v. The House of Representatives of the Republic of Andorn​

Verdict and Opinion of the Court
Delivered by Chief Justice Unseatedduke1
Concurred by Justice Mask3D_WOLF

The matter before the Court concerns the constitutional process following a presidential veto and the authority of the Congress to override such a veto. Specifically, the Court is asked to decide whether a bill which has been vetoed by the President and subsequently overridden by the Congress requires renewed Executive Assent before becoming law. After full consideration of the constitutional text, the arguments presented by both parties, and the structure of the government established under the Constitution of the Republic of Andorn, this Court finds in favor of the Plaintiff, the Executive of the Republic.

The Constitution does indeed outline a clear process for the passage of legislation. Article 1 Section 4(3) states that legislation must be sent to the President for Assent or Veto and that only once a law has received Presidential Assent will it become law. However, this clause must be read in conjunction with the broader principles of checks and balances that underpin our constitutional system.

The power of the Congress to override a presidential veto is necessarily implied in any system where the Executive does not possess absolute authority over legislation. To interpret the Constitution as requiring renewed assent after an override would create an endless loop of veto and override, effectively nullifying the override power and upsetting the balance of powers among the branches of government.

The Constitution does not require every enacted law to bear the President’s final signature, nor does it grant the Executive perpetual control over the legislative process. When the Congress exercises its override authority with the constitutionally required majority, the law must take effect without further action by the President. This is not only a practical necessity but a structural requirement of separation of powers.


Accordingly, the Court declares:

1. A bill which has been vetoed by the President and thereafter overridden by the requisite majority of Congress becomes law without the need for renewed Executive Assent.
2. The interpretation advanced by the Defense, while presented in good faith, is inconsistent with the Constitution when read in full and in context.
3. No further Executive action is required following a successful override vote.

This judgment affirms the fundamental principle that no branch may hold exclusive or indefinite power over the legislative process and that each must act within the scope of its constitutional authority.