The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Plaintiff Alleges Her Children Were "Trafficked by Members of the Democratic Party's Babylonian Talmud-Adherent Ashkenazi Jewish Cartel-Controlled Foster Care Sex Trade"
A short excerpt from Magistrate Judge Paul Evangelista's long Report and Recommendation Mar. 31 in Uzamere v. Gregg (N.D.N.Y.), which was adopted Thursday by Judge Anthony Brindisi:
To the extent it can be deciphered, it appears plaintiff's claims all stem from her belief of the existence an enormous conspiracy in which various judges, officials, attorneys, and people in positions of leadership, government or otherwise, seek to cause her great misfortune based on her belief that judges or people in government who have Ashkenazi Jewish heritage—or whom she believes to have such heritage—are violent, racist pedophiles. She asserts that she is being targeted by those individuals and entitles, or supporters of those individuals and entities, out of their racism against her, a desire to quash her public sharing of her beliefs, and—somehow—perverse sexual gratification….
Plaintiff's amended complaint is 142 pages in length with 2,143 pages in appended exhibits…. Plaintiff states that she:
bring[s] this action to permanently enjoin the defendants, who, as anti-black bigots and members of a violent, seditious, and rabbi-influenced ethnoreligious cartel from further employing government institutions' termination mechanisms to engineer antitrust restraints on my constitutional right to receive congressionally mandated, government-funded financial, educational and protective services which the defendants now treat as Jew-owned merchandise that is withheld from me to subject me to public defamation/public denigration; political persecution; sexually sadistic law enforcement terrorism, educational and economic deprivation to which Jews subject African Americans, Ethiopian Jews and Palestinians; and to enforce the Babylonian Talmud's espousal of the hatred of people of African descent; the Babylonian Talmud's espousal of Jews' right to lie to non-Jews in court settings; the Babylonian Talmud's espousal of Jews' right to have sex with children; the Babylonian Talmud's espousal of Jews' right to subject non-Jews to theft, kidnapping and murder with impunity; and the Babylonian Talmud's prohibition against reporting the tortious and criminal acts committed by lawbreaking Jews as an actionable act of antisemitism in a court of law, for which Jewish leadership's anti-gentile, predatory acts are protected by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance use of the 'working definitions of antisemitism' to duplicitously place Jews in a perpetual state of Munchausen Syndrome by proxy victimhood as a cover … [.]
Plaintiff makes many references to and provides and attachments of documents that appear relevant to her marriage, divorce, and spousal support issues. Plaintiff refers to a decades-long conspiracy, potentially beginning in 1979, in which she claims she was denied spousal support and child support, her children were placed in foster care (though, she claims to have placed them voluntarily) and "trafficked by members of the Democratic Party's Babylonian Talmud-adherent Ashkenazi Jewish cartel-controlled foster care sex trade where my children were both sodomized," she was denied a variety of government services and help, she was subjected to baseless and false criminal prosecution, denied assistance of counsel, provided with falsified documents, and subjected to involuntary psychiatric commitment, and intimidation by a variety of defendants, perhaps most prominently mentioned being U.S. District Judge Nicholas Garaufis of the Eastern District of New York—all as part of the overall conspiracy to "enforce the Babylonian Talmudic Law of Moser's Prohibition from Reporting Tortious and Criminal Acts of Lawbreaking Jews." …
Even when read with special solicitude, plaintiff's amended complaint must be dismissed as frivolous. All of plaintiff's causes of action against defendants must be dismissed as frivolous because they are all premised on the "irrational" theory that the tens of thousands of defendants are collectively engaged in a decades-long conspiracy to violate plaintiff's constitutional rights, prosecute her, involuntarily hospitalize, her prevent her (decades ago) from obtaining spousal and child support, or deprive her access to the courts, based on their participation in or connection with a "Babylonian Talmudic, Ashkenazi Jewish ethnoreligious cartel" that "hate[s] African-Americans" and allegedly condones "pedophilia and sexual violence" and/or their disagreement with and plaintiff's public sharing of her beliefs that they engage in violent acts and pedophilic acts with children, as "directed by rabbis." …
Plaintiff's amended complaint provides that the viewpoint discrimination stems from the judicial officers' and others' membership/participation in, or aiding and abetting of, the "seditious conspiracy." Review of plaintiff's prior decisions, however, indicate that plaintiff's First Amendment claims are frivolous and fail to state a claim because those cases were not dismissed because of viewpoint discrimination.
Although some of these decisions observed that plaintiff's submissions contained language that was antisemitic or troubling, those observations are dicta. It is abundantly clear that those cases were decidedly not dismissed because of the judges' beliefs that her claims or statements were antisemitic or and/or troubling; rather, the dismissals were on other sound legal grounds, such as frivolity, lack of subject matter jurisdiction, collateral estoppel/res judicata, and many others. Accordingly, in addition to dismissal for frivolity grounds, plaintiff's First Amendment claims can be alternatively dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted….
Although plaintiff is "new" to this District, given that this appears to be the first action she has commenced here, based on her pattern of behavior in similar actions in other courts, her frivolous threats of legal action against clerk's office employees, and the content of this amended complaint, it is likely plaintiff will seek to pursue additional frivolous and duplicative lawsuits in this District. "Given plaintiff's vexatious history of filing significant numbers of frivolous actions, it is further recommended that, if the District Judge adopts this Report-Recommendation & Order, the District Judge warn plaintiff that if he is to file further frivolous actions in this district, a bar order may result."
{The undersigned further wishes to make the District Judge aware that the Clerk's office has informed the undersigned that plaintiff has engaged in daily harassing phone calls/electronic help-desk communications to this Court's clerk's office, where plaintiff often raises her voice; spews abusive, racist comments toward the recipients of her calls; and threatens lawsuits against court employees because she disagrees with the amount of time it takes for the Court to address her filings. When advised that the Court is aware of her filings and that they will be addressed in due course—which is in line with the Court's large volume of cases, including many that were filed before plaintiff's—plaintiff accused the nonjudicial staff of conspiring to "hide" her filings from the judges. The undersigned observes that plaintiff has previously engaged in similar conduct toward clerk's office employees in at least one prior case, with the Eastern District of New York noting that, in addition to "engag[ing], at times, in harassing, and sometimes antisemitic telephone calls to the Clerk's Office and to chambers[,]" plaintiff even "attempted to contact judicial staff outside of the Courthouse."}
Given that plaintiff oft commences actions in forma pauperis but then pays the filing fee, the undersigned recommends that any warning advise plaintiff that any bar that may be imposed—after providing her with notice and an opportunity to be heard—would prohibit her from filing any new action, either in forma pauperis or through paying the filing fee, without prior permission of the Court….
For a similar case from last year, though involving a lawyer and not just a vexatious litigant, see here.
