ORDER DISMISSING CASE
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon filing the Complaint. The instant Complaint was filed herein January 5, 2011 [DE 1].1 Plaintiff Guerami, proceeding pro se, brings an action seeking the Court to declare 2 U.S.C. 2a, 2b, and 2c as unconstitutional. See [DE 1].1 Plaintiff's Complaint, in its entirety, states as follows:
- I, Aaron Guerami, plaintiff, in the above styled cause, sues defendant(s) John Boenher
- This action is filed Article 1 Section 2 Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution.
- 2 U.S.C 2a, 2b, 2c change the process of representation under Article 1 Section 2 Clause 3 without an Article V amendment.
- Article 1 Section 2 Clause 3: The number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every 30000, but each State shall have at least one Representative.
- 2 U.S.C. 2a (a) ... and the number of Representatives to which each State would be entitled under apportionment of then existing number of Representatives by the method known as equal proportions, no State to receive less than one member.
- Wherefore, I demand the Courts to declare 2 U.S.C.2a, 2b,2c as unconstitutional.
1 Plaintiff sees leave to proceed in forma pauperis. [DE-2]
After careful review, the Court concludes that the Plaintiff fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted. The more serious defects, however, are standing and ripeness.Because standing is jurisdictional, it must be considered by the Court sua sponte. AT&T Mobility,LLC v. National Ass'n for Stock Car Auto Racing, Inc., 494F.3d 1356,1360 (11th Cir. 2007). "Standing and ripeness present the threshold jurisdictional question of whether a court may consider the merits of a dispute." Elend v. Basham, 471 F.3d1199,1024 (11th Cir. 2006) (citation omitted). "Both standing and ripeness originate from the Constitution's Article III requirement that the jurisdiction of federal courts be limited to actual cases and controversies." Id. at 1204-1205 (citation omitted)."It is now axiomatic that standing requires the plaintiff to demonstrate injury in fact, causation, and redressability." Id., at 1205 (citation omitted). Here, where Plaintiff's Complaint fails to allege any facts which establish an actual case and controversy, the Court is not permitted to opine on the constitutionality of the section of the United States Constitution about which the Plaintiff complains.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
- Plaintiff's Complain [DE 1] is hereby DISMISSED, without prejudice to file an amended complaint on or before January 20, 2011. The Clerk shall CLOSE this case and DENY any pending motions as moot.
From what I understand of this dismissal is, I have not described the standing of the complaint.
There are three standing requirements:
- Injury: The plaintiff must have suffered or imminently will suffer injury—an invasion of a legally protected interest that is concrete and particularized. The injury must be actual or imminent, distinct and palpable, not abstract. This injury could be economic as well as non-economic.
- Causation: There must be a causal connection between the injury and the conduct complained of, so that the injury is fairly traceable to the challenged action of the defendant and not the result of the independent action of some third party who is not before the court.
- Redressability: It must be likely, as opposed to merely speculative, that a favorable court decision will redress the injury
Ripeness: Ripeness represents the other side of the coin of standing, and deals with whether the defendant in a case has gone so far in his/her abusive behavior that the court has a right to hear the case.
In this case The argument is ripe for action