James “James Freeman” Springer’s (Freeman) suffered a significant blow on Wednesday when Judge Margaret Strickland gave him 21 days to show cause as to why his lawsuit against New Mexico’s 7th District should not be thrown out.
Freeman sued last year after he claimed his civil rights were violated after he was banned from courthouses in the 7th District unless he had official business and a police escort after a series of incidents in 2023.
The YouTuber and First Amendment Auditor (now claiming to be an “investigator” and “journalist”) had three tries to properly state his actual complaint against those he was suing. All three, including his original complaint and two amended complaints, failed in the basic structure of telling who did what and how they did it.
Even after direct orders to show cause in the second amended complaint against the Courthouse workers who had no judicial immunity or protections, Freeman was either incapable or unwilling to do so, instead offering two new paragraphs and a brief rewording to his existing amended complaint and then offering it as his second amended complaint.
The defense has an outstanding motion to dismiss the case based on Freeman’s unwillingness to say how he was wronged or who wronged him based on the merits of his argument and not on judicial immunity.
Strickland’s order introduces judicial immunity to the case as she seems to be under the opinion that almost everything that Freeman has raised should be dismissed due to that immunity. After explaining Judicial Immunity under the Eleventh Amendment to the Constitution, she ordered him to show cause why the case should not be dismissed.
Judge Strickland also ordered Freeman to show how his attempt to sue the defendants in their individual capacity for injunctive relief under Section 1983 should be allowed. This may prove problematic for Freeman as section 1983 says that plaintiffs may only sue individual capacity defendants for monetary damages and only sue official capacity defendants for injunctive relief.
Freeman now has 21 days to show cause as to why his motions should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim. The defense would then have 14 days to reply to his response. If his response survives the Court’s order, it would then be subject to the defense’s existing motion to dismiss.
Tip Jar
ReallyCoolNews is a free daily publication devoted to the First Amendment Auditing community. If you’d like to support the publication/help keep the author fed/help support his animals, we offer the following ways to contribute:
CashApp: https://cash.me/$reallycoolsite
Paypal: https://paypal.me/ReallyCoolSite?country.x=US&locale.x=en_US
GoFundMe: https://gofund.me/b8144e31
Critter Fund: https://www.amazon.com/registries/gl/guest-view/1GACKBD5N136L
Buy Jim Something: https://www.amazon.com/registries/gl/guest-view/2BKN32QZLN1OD
Donations go towards keeping the lights on, feeding critters, improving the site and paying site hosting costs and future upgrades.
Share this:
- Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)