Opinion
Civil Action No. 1:11-cv-01461
08-02-2011
Barbara M. Bush, Plaintiff, v. U.S. Congress, Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff's pro se complaint and application to proceed in forma pauperis. The application will be granted and the complaint, failing to establish plaintiff's legal standing to sue, will be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3) (requiring the court to dismiss an action "at any time" it determines that subject matter jurisdiction is wanting); Haase v. Sessions, 835 F.2d 902, 906 (D.C. Cir. 1987) ("[T]he defect of standing is a defect in subject matter jurisdiction.").
Article III of the U.S. Constitution "limits the 'judicial power' of the United States to the resolution of 'cases' and 'controversies.' " Valley Forge Christian Coll. v. Am. United for Separation of Church and State, Inc., 454 U.S. 464, 471 (1982). The doctrine of standing serves to identify those " 'Cases' and 'Controversies' that are of the justiciable sort referred to in Article III." Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560 (1992). To establish the "irreducible constitutional minimum of standing," a plaintiff must allege (1) an "injury in fact," defined as "an invasion of a legally protected interest which is (a) concrete and particularized," and (b) "actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical"; (2) "a causal connection between the injury and the conduct complained of; and (3) a likelihood "that the injury will be redressed by a favorable decision." Id. at 560-61 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). In order for an injury to be "concrete and particularized," it must "affect the plaintiff in a personal and individual way." Id. at 560 n.l.
Plaintiff, a resident of Hyattsville, Maryland, challenges the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 3552(b), which she claims "authorizes imprisonment in a federal prison for an 'initial' mental health evaluation under 18 U.S.C. § 4241, of a 'non-convicted U.S. citizen." Compl. at 1-2. Plaintiff suggests that she was imprisoned under the challenged statute from February 2007 to July 2007, id. at 1, but there is no indication from the complaint that she is currently affected by the statute. See id. at 2 (stating that "[t]he charge was dismissed on 6/3/11). Therefore, the Court will dismiss the complaint for lack of standing.
____________________
United States District Judge