Judicial Review: Changing Citizens Nations

Today the Court considers the question of citizenship, specifically whether citizenship is transferrable from one nation to another if both nations are controlled by the same player. Petitioner Boris Johnson Appreciation Society (hereafter referred to as Will) also controls the nation Great Alemonia, and wishes to utilize it as his primary nation. Petitioner Will contends that existing law is ambiguous as to whether he can transfer his citizenship from one nation to another, and has requested that this Court issue an advisory opinion on the government’s ability to make such a transfer.


Citizenship is defined in both the Constitution and the Legal Code. Two conditions must exist in order for citizenship to be granted: an account on the region’s forum, and a week’s continuous residency in the region. Of particular note in the Constitution is the second half of the relevant section, specifying that “[e]ach individual user may only register one account on the Regional Forum, regardless of the number of nations which they possess or control” (Constitution, Article 1, Section 2). Residents are defined in the Constitution as “any nation which resides within The Versutian Federation” (Constitution, Article 1, Section 1). There is no limit to the number of residents a player may control, but the Constitution specifically places a limit on how many forum accounts, which are a necessary component of citizenship, may be created. While the word “nation” is used most frequently in our legal system and much of the game of NationStates to refer to members of the community, here the Constitution clearly acknowledges not only the status of players as individuals, but also the fact that players of the game may control more than one nation. The Legal Code specifies that “All residents of The Versutian Federation may apply for citizenship in the region by creating a forum account” (Legal Code, Chapter 1, Clause 2). Clearly, while every resident of the region has this as an option, a player controlling more than one nation would not be able to have each of their puppet nations create a forum account and obtain citizenship status after a week. This would be absurd on its face and obviously unconstitutional.

It is clear, then, that the Constitution already contemplates a situation such as the one Petitioner Will finds himself in, and has distinguished between the individual player and the nation, or nations, that he controls. Will, by virtue of having a forum account and a nation which has been a resident for at least a week, currently is a citizen of the region. Most rights in the Constitution are afforded to all nations in the region, though there are specific rights exclusive to citizens (Constitution, Article 1, Sections 4-5). These rights are all set forth in terms of an individual, not a collective, because as players of this game we understand the term “nation” to refer to an account in the game of NationStates. The term citizen, however, refers in this case to an individual who controls two different types of accounts, a forum account and a NationStates account. Controlling both is necessary to maintain citizenship.

The Legal Code sets conditions for removing citizenship in the event the citizen fails to maintain a nation in the region, including if it ceased to exist or because the citizen left the region (Legal Code, Chapter 1, Clause 3). Citizens may hold office, including the office of Delegate, which requires membership in the WA, and WA membership can only be held by one nation under a player’s control at any given time. Even the other offices involve regional powers which can only be assigned to specific nations. One could not credibly claim that all puppets controlled by a player in the region must be granted those same powers, and obviously multiple puppets cannot receive the endorsements given to a Delegate. Along the same line, if a player occupying an office in the region moved a puppet out of the region, this would not constitute their leaving the region, as long as the nation they control with the additional status conferred by the office remains in the region. It logically follows, then, that as a practical matter it makes a difference which nation, if you control more than one, is designated a citizen of the region.

But can Will simply identify one of his other nations and use that as his citizen nation, even though it may not have gone through what we understand to be the proper process for obtaining citizenship? The Court has already observed that the Constitution contemplates the player behind the nation, and the fact that he may have more than one nation. As has already been determined, a player can only go through this process once, as it is impossible for more than one forum account to be utilized by a player. When Will created his forum account, he fulfilled half of the necessary conditions to become a citizen. The other half of the conditions was maintaining residency for a week. Whether he brings in a new nation or utilizes one that is already here, such as the one he used when he first obtained citizenship, Will has maintained residency for a continuous week. As such, he became a citizen and remains so to this day.

It simply cannot be the case that Will would not be permitted to designate a new nation as his “main” nation. To believe that, one would have to insist on this newly designated nation to go through a new citizenship process that not only was already completed, but could not be completed again. Players are already allowed multiple nations, but are not allowed multiple accounts. If this course were insisted upon, the government would be in the business of creating second forum accounts and deleting existing ones and temporarily stripping away a citizen’s rights that they rightfully earned if their original nation leaves the region, or, even more absurdly if their former nation is still in the region, letting them utilize a new forum account immediately but make them wait a week to utilize a different NationStates account despite the fact they continue to be a citizen.

There are obviously circumstances where changing nations would not be feasible, such as if the player were a sitting Delegate, as endorsements would need to be shifted and the government’s business would be adversely affected. An officer who moves the nation with regional powers assigned to it would also require remedy as any new nation that player seeks to use would need those powers added and the powers removed from the old nation. Such logistics are important and should be carefully thought out by the player, and by Parliament. But as it stands, this Court opines that Will would be permitted to designate a different nation his “main” nation for the purposes of citizenship.

This concludes the Court's business in this case.