Boyd v. United States of America
1:16-cv-00802
| S.D. Ohio | Feb 21, 2017Background
- Plaintiffs Preston Lee Boyd and Martain Boyd Thompkins, proceeding in forma pauperis, sued Wayne County, various state and federal courts, a sheriff’s department, and the State of Michigan alleging violations of Native American/treaty rights and seeking relief under UCC provisions and 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
- The Magistrate Judge screened the complaint and recommended dismissal with prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) for lack of federal jurisdiction and because the named defendants were not subject to suit.
- Boyd filed objections invoking “sovereign citizen” and related theories, claiming he is a Sovereign Indigenous Native American Moor and not subject to U.S. statutes; he also cited papal statements about a Year of Jubilee.
- The district court reviewed the objections de novo, noting pro se filings are liberally construed but general or frivolous objections fail to preserve issues for review.
- The court rejected Boyd’s sovereign-citizen arguments as legally baseless and frivolous, adopted the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation in full, overruled Boyd’s objections, and dismissed the complaint with prejudice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Federal subject-matter jurisdiction | Boyd asserted federal questions based on treaty/Natural rights and UCC filings | Complaint lacks factual context to establish a federal question | Dismissed for lack of federal jurisdiction |
| Whether named defendants are subject to suit | Boyd seeks damages and equitable relief against courts, state, and county actors | Courts and state entities are not proper defendants for the asserted claims | Claims dismissed because defendants not subject to suit |
| Validity of sovereign-citizen and similar defenses | Boyd claimed sovereign Indigenous status and invoked Jubilee/papal authority to avoid application of U.S. law | Such sovereign-citizen theories are legally baseless and frivolous | Court rejected these arguments as meritless |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Mundt, 29 F.3d 233 (6th Cir. 1994) (rejecting sovereign-citizen defenses as frivolous)
- Howard v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 932 F.2d 505 (6th Cir. 1991) (general objections to a magistrate judge's report are insufficient to preserve issues)
- Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89 (2007) (pro se complaints to be liberally construed)
- Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 (1976) (pro se litigant standards cited for liberal construction)