1. Lack of subject matter jurisdiction
2. Improper service of process
3. Failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted
4. Lack of standing
5. Pure fucking lunacy

for ALL those reasons.

And if i were the District Judge in this case I would slap her with court costs and require a hefty bond if she wants to file any additional pleadings, both of which federal judges can do within their inherent authority.

I'd also call the guys with the butterfly nets and the rubber truck.

Just because somebody's pro se doesn't give them the right to fuck up the court system. Every judge I've known just dreads having to deal with pro se litigants, usually because they are barking mad (evidenced by the fact that no real lawyer will touch their case) and because they haven't a clue about civil procedure so they just file one insane pleading after another and can't be persuaded to go away.

My judge dismissed their cases immediately and said they could file with the court all the pleadings they wanted. All they had to do first was go out and get a $10,000 bond and post it with the court administrator. That took care of things very nicely.

And yes, they are inevitably the kind of lunatics who think they will foment a national dog revolution by screeching on streetcorners and that the CIA is beaming messages to their fillings. Always.

I don't have anything to wear to court! lol

I really don't want to go to Nebraska.

I was thinking she was suing for more women to be gay, and yeah, I'd be on board. In fact, a few women that "become gay" will probably want to sue for damages once they realize there is an alternative. (I kid - well, sort of)

in all matters of things. This goes back to the Magna Carta and was preserved in our federal and state constitutions.

That right, however, is balanced by the government's right to throw out some petitions as insane.

important to a question of law?

We used to have funny farms for creatures like this.

Fortunately, she, nor gawd, has standing under the Federal Rules, at least as I understand them.

I can imagine Jesus saying, "You know, Heaven isn't too bad. There's good beer and I don't have to deal with lunatics. Think I'll just stay put for a few more millenia..."

I can't sue you for gluttony, or worshiping idols, or anything.

At best, it's a frivolous lawsuit - at worst, it's a symptom of mental illness.

<a href=".html" target="_blank"><img src="" border="0" alt=" photo triple.fcepalm_zpsz4cjz74x.jpg"/></a>

as my considered legal opinion.

... because it is no proof that priests can not, or that the Bible does not." -The Life and Works of Thomas Paine, Vol. 9 p. 134

"Revelation is necessarily limited to the first communication-- after that it is only an account of something which that person says was a revelation made to him; and though he may find himself obliged to believe it, it can not be incumbent on me to believe it in the same manner; for it was not a revelation made to ME, and I have only his word for it that it was made to him." -Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason

"There are matters in the Bible, said to be done by the express commandment of God, that are shocking to humanity and to every idea we have of moral justice....." -Thomas Paine