Court records indicate that Lucha El Por Libertad “was among eleven “Moorish American Nationals” who were traveling “in the private [sic] for a militia camping trip . . . while exercising their [S]econd [A]mendment rights”—that is, carrying firearms.” He says that he has suffered a number of abuses and constitutional violations by the Massachusetts State Police.
He also claims that: “Defendant Judge Emily K. Karstetter and non-party Judge Peter F. Doyle conspired to manipulate the outcome of Plaintiff’s criminal case in supposed violation of international law.8Link to the text of the note Plaintiff attempts to assert claims for defamation, “[d]iscrimination against [n]ational origin,” “[d]eprivation of [r]ights under color-of-[ l]aw,” and “genocide.”9Link to the text of the note He also cites various constitutional claims, including infringements of his “right to travel” and Second Amendment right to bear arms.10Link to the text of the note As a remedy, Plaintiff “demand[s] that [his] . . . ‘charge(s)’ . . . of possession of a firearm, possession of a large capacity firearm, [*3] conspiracy to improperly store firearms, conspiracy to commit a felony[,] etc. be dismissed” and that he be awarded $18,000,000.”
The court, one by one, provides a rationale for why his arguments are legally wrong. In particular, the court notes, Courts routinely, summarily, and firmly reject sovereign citizen legal theories as “frivolous…[Sovereign citizen] theories should be rejected summarily, however they are presented.” Dismissal of this action is appropriate and warranted based on its legal insufficiency and the frivolity inherent in all sovereign citizen legal theories—”[s]uch sovereign citizen claptrap has been rejected over and over.”
This is definitely my favorite line: “all sovereign citizen legal theories—”[s]uch sovereign citizen claptrap has been rejected over and over.”
This case was dismissed without prejudice.