Washington D.C. was thrown into absolute chaos this morning following an unprecedented and explosive move by one of the world’s most powerful figures. Elias Thorne, the billionaire CEO of SpaceFlow and a dominant voice in modern media, has officially submitted a controversial petition to the House Judiciary Committee. The document, which Thorne calls a “Request for National Referency,” demands a public vote on the citizenship status of sitting Congresswoman Layla Amir.

The petition, titled “The Patriotism & Allegiance Review,” specifically questions whether a naturalized official who “undermines national values” should remain a citizen of the United States. While couched in legal language, the core of the request is a direct challenge to Amir’s right to remain in the country she serves, a move that legal scholars are already calling “the most dangerous test of the 14th Amendment in a century.”

“This is not about politics; this is about the survival of our national identity,” Thorne declared in a video statement released on his social media platform, Pulse, moments after the filing. “If a representative hates the foundation of the home that welcomed them, the landlords—the American people—should have the right to evict.”

The reaction on Capitol Hill was instantaneous and volcanic. Representative Amir, a vocal progressive and former refugee who has frequently clashed with Thorne over tax policy and foreign aid, held an emergency press conference on the steps of the Capitol. Surrounded by a phalanx of supporters and fellow lawmakers, she denounced the move as a “racist intimidation tactic” designed to silence dissent.

“This is not a legal filing; it is a permission slip for hate,” Amir said, her voice shaking with controlled anger. “Mr. Thorne wants to turn the Constitution into a reality TV show where citizenship is a prize that can be revoked if you don’t clap loudly enough for the billionaires. I am an American, and I am not going anywhere.”

The showdown has effectively paralyzed the legislative agenda, with the House floor dissolving into shouting matches between factions. Thorne’s supporters argue that he is simply exercising his right to petition the government and raising valid questions about loyalty and assimilation. They view the “referency” as the ultimate expression of direct democracy.

“Elias Thorne is saying what millions are thinking but are too afraid to say,” stated conservative commentator Mark Halloway. “Why should citizenship be a suicide pact? If you want to dismantle the country, you shouldn’t get to keep the passport.”

Opponents, however, see the move as a terrifying drift toward authoritarianism. Civil rights groups have flooded the streets of D.C., chanting “Citizenship is a Right, Not a Reward.” They argue that allowing a popular vote on an individual’s citizenship status would set a precedent that could strip the rights of millions of naturalized Americans based on their political views.

“This is the textbook definition of mob rule,” warned Harvard constitutional law professor Sarah Jenkins. “There is no mechanism in American law for a ‘referency’ on an individual’s citizenship. Thorne knows this. He isn’t trying to win a court case; he is trying to incite a culture war.”

The clash has spilled over into the digital realm, where the debate has become toxic. Thorne’s platform, Pulse, has become a battleground of hashtags, with #DeportAmir and #StandWithLayla trending globally. The rhetoric has alarmed security officials, who report a spike in threats against both the Congresswoman and the Tech CEO.

House Speaker John Sterling finds himself in an impossible position. While he cannot legally act on Thorne’s “referency” request under current laws, dismissing it outright risks alienating the massive populist base that Thorne commands. Sources say Sterling is frantically seeking a way to table the motion without sparking a full-blown revolt within his own party.

“The Speaker is walking a tightrope over a volcano,” an insider aide revealed. “If he ignores Thorne, the donors revolt. If he entertains this, he breaks the Constitution. There is no good exit strategy here.”

The business world is also watching closely, as Thorne’s aggressive political maneuvering begins to impact his companies’ stock prices. Investors are worried that his “total war” against a sitting government official could invite regulatory retaliation that threatens his business empire. Yet, Thorne appears undeterred, seemingly willing to burn his capital to win this ideological battle.

In a surprise twist late this afternoon, a group of naturalized citizens serving in the military released an open letter condemning Thorne’s proposal. “We fought for this country to defend the Constitution, not to see it shredded by a billionaire’s ego,” the letter read. This intervention has added a layer of moral complexity to the debate that Thorne’s camp has struggled to address.

Representative Amir has vowed to introduce a censure resolution against any member of Congress who supports Thorne’s petition. “We need to know who in this building believes that ‘Equal Justice Under Law’ comes with an asterisk,” she challenged.

As night falls, the crowds outside the Supreme Court continue to grow. The building is lit up, a silent witness to a nation grappling with the fundamental question of who belongs. The “Thorne-Amir Feud” has ceased to be a personal rivalry; it has mutated into a referendum on the American soul.

The coming days will likely see legal challenges, protests, and perhaps the most heated political rhetoric the nation has seen in decades. But one thing is certain: the era of polite disagreement is over. Elias Thorne has thrown a grenade into the machinery of democracy, and everyone is waiting to see if the structure can withstand the explosion.

For Ilhan Omar (in the real world) or Layla Amir (in this fiction), the message is clear: the boundaries of citizenship and the definition of loyalty are being redrawn in real-time. Whether this “referency” ever reaches a ballot box is almost irrelevant; the damage of asking the question may already be done.

The world watches with bated breath as America debates whether “Making America Great” means subtracting the people who challenge it. The answer will define the nation for the next century.