(PS) Wooten v. Trump
2:25-cv-00873
E.D. Cal.Jun 25, 2025Background
- Robert Wooten, proceeding pro se, filed suit in the Eastern District of California seeking to enjoin Donald J. Trump and associates from issuing or enforcing executive orders until their constitutionality is determined.
- Plaintiff requested a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction, arguing for immediate relief.
- The magistrate judge found no basis for standing in the complaint and identified Plaintiff’s claims as barred by the political question doctrine.
- Wooten filed a motion to alter or amend the judgment contending a First Amendment right to petition, which the court recognized but found did not confer standing.
- The court conducted a de novo review of the findings and recommendations, ultimately agreeing with the magistrate’s conclusion.
- The complaint was dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, and the case was closed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing to challenge executive orders in federal court | Wooten argued he has the right to petition the govt | Not specified in text | No standing was found |
| Right to judicial review of executive order authority | Invoked First Amendment right to petition | Not specified in text | Court found claim frivolous |
| Political question doctrine applicability | Implicitly argued for justiciability | Not specified in text | Political question applies |
| Propriety of temporary restraining order and injunction | Sought immediate injunctive relief | Not specified in text | Relief denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Bill Johnson’s Rests., Inc. v. N.L.R.B., 461 U.S. 731 (recognizes right of access to courts as part of First Amendment right to petition)
- Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343 (right of access to courts is not abstract or unfettered)
- Raines v. Byrd, 521 U.S. 811 (Article III standing is a bedrock jurisdictional requirement; standing must be especially rigorous for separation of powers cases)
- Valley Forge Christian Coll. v. Ams. United for Separation of Church and State, Inc., 454 U.S. 464 (litigant must demonstrate standing for federal jurisdiction)
- Blaisdell v. Frappiea, 729 F.3d 1237 (First Amendment court access tethered to Article III standing)