Opinion
Civil Action 24-01419 (UNA)
07-01-2024
WILLIAM FREDERICK KEMP, JR., Plaintiff, v. JOSEPH BIDEN et al., Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
TIMOTHY J. KELLY, United States District Judge.
This action, brought pro se, is before the Court on review of Plaintiff's complaint, ECF No. 1, and motion to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 2. The Court will grant the motion and dismiss the complaint.
Plaintiff, a resident of Bellevue, Ohio, has sued President Joe Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, other high-profile individuals including New York Judge Arthur Engoron, New York Attorney General Letitia James, New York District Attorney Alvin Bragg, U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, FBI Director Christopher Wray, and Hunter Biden, and “All Career Democratic Polititions [sic] Congress.” Compl. Caption (parentheses omitted). The pleading's lengthy title, Compl. at 1-2, and rambling allegations posit a vast conspiracy to, among other things, give “aid and comfort to illegal invaders and terrorists” and “destroy Donald Trump or at least to stop Trump from running in the 2024 election.” Id. at 5.
Plaintiff claims that “[t]here is enough evidence to bring R.I.C.O. charges against this corrupt President; Clinton, and Obama; and their corrupt career democratic politicians[.]” Id. He seeks sweeping injunctive relief, including an “order closing of America's Borders and immediate deportation of all illegal invaders,” “treason charges against defendants,” and prosecutions for, among other things, “conspiracy to murder,” “interference with interstate and international commerce,” and “colussion [sic] with China[.]” Id. at 6-7.
Complaints, as here, that are supported wholly by allegations lacking “an arguable basis either in law or in fact” may be dismissed as frivolous. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). The term frivolous “embraces not only the inarguable legal conclusion, but also the fanciful factual allegation.” Id.; see Williams v. United States Department of Justice, 689 F. App'x. 645, 646 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (per curiam) (affirming dismissal on frivolous ground of complaint alleging “a vast government conspiracy”). Federal courts, moreover, “are without power to entertain claims otherwise within their jurisdiction if they are so attenuated and unsubstantial as to be absolutely devoid of merit, wholly insubstantial, [or] obviously frivolous[.]” Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 528, 536-37 (1974) (cleaned up). Consequently, this case will be dismissed by separate order. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) (requiring immediate dismissal of a frivolous action).