To my fellow students on the East Coast following the political drama unfolding across the Atlantic in The Union, here's the latest scoop from the Congressional session that took place on what would've been an ordinary fall day:

Speaker Mr. Stanisław Małachowski opened the session, stressing the importance of familiar legislative paths over forging new ones. This session revolved heavily around a project presented by the Deputation, involving respective Polish-Ukrainian and Lithuanian-Belarussian internal affairs which had previously stirred some controversy.

Secretary Mr. Jan Łuszczewski dove into the draft of the so-called Cardinal Laws, which led to a lively discussion among the Congressional leaders. A speech from Mr. Sebastian Dłuski from Lublin proposed some legacy Polish-Ukrainian legal principles to be maintained while other regulations should be categorized as Constitutional rather than Cardinal.

Mr. Ignacy Potocki, the Under Secretary of State for Lithuania-Belarus, entered the debate regarding the "Neminem captivabimus" law, a principle about fair arrest and detention, asserting that sticking to the traditional legal interpretations wouldn't harm newly formulated ones.

Debates encompassed various civil liberties, including the right to fair trial and freedom of speech and the press, emphasizing the fine line between upholding freedom and preventing chaos. Discussions were intense concerning the balance between free speech within Congress and its potential to incite unrest, with numerous Representatives and Senators passionately advocating for unrestricted debate and expression in Congressional proceedings and print.

President Stanisław August Poniatowski himself weighed in on the discussion, advocating for a balance that would ensure free expression without endangering public order or harming reputations unjustly.

After much discourse and amendments, a unanimous decision was reached on Article X of the Cardinal Laws. The debate on whether to differentiate between spoken words and printed text, and how to regulate freedom of speech to avoid incitement of rebellions, reflected the broader societal concerns about the responsibilities that come with liberty.

The day was also peppered with reminders of how these issues had been addressed in past Congressional sessions, with several Representatives recalling personal experiences of being targeted by restrictive measures from former times.

As the House adjourned until Thursday at 10 am, the desire for increased freedom and a fair judicial framework was palpable, reserving a special focus on the essential and delicate freedom of expression and its profound connection to the fundamental principles on which The Union rests.

Stay tuned for more coverage of the Congressional jousting in The Union, from where I'll continue to bring you updates on our friends' leaps toward a modern governance system.

Topics: Sejm session; Cardinal Laws; Freedom of speech; Press censorship; Parliamentary work; Military discipline; Equality before the law; Free voting; Freedom of the press; Parliamentary criticism; Honor defense; Press offenses; Criminal law; Public justification;