The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
"The Alleged Misdeeds of Jewish Individuals, Elected Officials, Judges and Others in Myriad Circumstances,"
"including Plaintiff's divorce proceedings and criminal case."
From Uzamere v. Trump, decided Monday by Judge Timothy Kelly (D.D.C.):
Over 201 paragraphs and 95 pages of the original complaint, Plaintiff purports to challenge Executive Orders 13899 and 14188 [the ones related to "Combating Anti-Semitism" -EV] on the ground that they "violate the Establishment Clause [of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution] that prohibits the government from establishing a religion; and the Free Exercise Clause, that protects individuals' right to practice their religion … as they choose."
Plaintiff, "an adherent of the Jehovah's Christian Witnesses sect," alleges the Executive Orders are "designed to subject individuals who engage in disseminating information regarding members of Jewish leadership who engage in unconstitutional, tortious or criminal acts that are permitted by the Babylonian Talmud to be subject to Jewish leadership's interference with commerce by threats, violence and other tortious and criminal offenses."
What follows is a lengthy discussion of Plaintiff's prior lawsuits, lawsuits filed by others, and the alleged misdeeds of Jewish individuals, elected officials, judges and others in myriad circumstances, including Plaintiff's divorce proceedings and criminal case. It is not clear whether or how these matters pertain to Executive Orders 13899 and 14188, however, particularly insofar as certain events occurred prior to the election of the current President of the United States and issuance of Executive Order 14188. Nor is it clear whether or how enforcement of the Executive Orders affects Plaintiff.
Plaintiff's original complaint is neither short, plain, nor intelligible, and her Errata (ECF No. 4) and myriad exhibits (ECF Nos. 1-1 through 1-58, 4-2 through 4-34) utterly [fail] to clarify matters. Because the pleading fails to meet Rule 8(a)'s minimum pleading standard, the Court will dismiss it without prejudice.
