Civil Rights News


There are a couple of big civil rights lawsuits to comment on today.

The one that appears to be getting the most attention today is the Supreme Court’s grant of a preliminary injunction against further enforcement of Governor Cuomo’s arbitrary limits on attendance at houses of worship. Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn, New York v. Cuomo. This is a significant First Amendment victory. The injunction also applies in Agudath Israel of America v. Cuomo.

The other case worth talking about is C. J. Pearson, et al. v. Kemp, et al. This case is filed in the U.S. District Court in Atlanta, and it alleges that this month’s election was conducted fraudulently in Georgia. The federal causes of action are based in 42 U.S.C § 1983. Section 1983 is a Reconstruction Era law which authorizes civil actions against officials acting under color of state law deprive a citizen of any of his rights, privileges, or immunities guaranteed under the Constitution. C. J. Pearson is not the first black voter to sue the State of Georgia. Sidney Powell and L. Lin Wood are among the lawyers who signed the complaint.

The next few weeks will be interesting.

A Civil Rights Victory


The Washington Free Beacon reports that the City of Los Angeles has been ordered to pay a six-figure award to the National Rifle Association because of a violation of the First Amendment. A federal judge struckdown a city ordinance aimed at punishing prospective contractors with ties to the NRA as an infringement on the rights to free speech and association. He ordered city officials to pay NRA’s attorneys’ fees of $150,000.

California is still part of the United States, so our Constitution is binding on its state and local governments. If it were successfully to secede (as certain folks have threatened), our Bill of Rights would no longer apply there. California’s state constitution is easily amended. How long would such inconvenient civil liberties as free speech be allowed to exist in a polity that keeps electing politicians that pass laws such as the one LA adopted to harass the NRA and its members and associates?

I left California in 1990 because I could see such tyrannical behavior taking hold.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day


Brett Kimberlin’s LOLsuits have failed because he has never been able to put together a logical argument that he has suffered any injury from truthful report about hime, his associates, and their activities. He’s had particular difficulty understanding what is admissible under the Rules of Evidence. The TKPOTD from six years ago today deals with one of the many times he was stopped by the judge enforcing those rules during the Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. trial.

* * * * *

It was pretty obvious from the load of … ah … junk he gave us in discovery for the Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. nuisance lawsuit that The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin didn’t understand the rules of evidence or how to properly structure his case. He proved both during the trial. For example, consider this question he was never able to ask of Stacy McCain because it dealt with hearsay.

MR. KIMBERLIN: So do you know what the Southern Poverty Law Center is?

MR. OSTRONIC: Objection Your Honor.

THE COURT: What does the Southern Poverty Law Center have to do with this case?

MR. KIMBERLIN: Well Mr. McCain has —

THE COURT: The Southern Poverty Law Center, what does that have to do with this case?

MR. KIMBERLIN: Mr. McCain is considered a neo-confederate — is one —

MR. OSTRONIC: Objection, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Well —

MR. KIMBERLIN: And the Southern Poverty Law Center

MR. OSTRONIC: Objection, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Hold on a second. Counsel I appreciate you objecting to my question but I’m not going to overrule myself. That’s not something I do. So what does the Southern Poverty Law Center have to do with this case? I’m not asking you about Mr. McCain, I’m asking you about why are you asking him about the Southern Poverty Law Center?

MR. KIMBERLIN: I’m asking him the Southern Poverty Law Center is the leading, one of the leading civil rights organizations in the —

THE COURT: I understand all of that but what does it have to do with this case?

MR. KIMBERLIN: Because —

THE COURT: And the claim that you are making against these gentlemen?

MR. KIMBERLIN: Because Southern Poverty Law Center regularly outs racists —

MR. OSTRONIC: Objection.

THE COURT: So what if they do. What does that have to do with this case? This case isn’t about racists or racism.

MR. KIMBERLIN: It’s about hate. It’s about hate. These people hate me and they do anything to destroy me.

THE COURT: Well but why are you asking this witness about the Southern Poverty Law Center? First of all he couldn’t testify as to anything they said or did because it wouldn’t be an exception to any hearsay rule. So you would never be able to get that in evidence anyway.

MR. KIMBERLIN: All right.

MR. KIMBERLIN: Mr.—

THE COURT: Your objection’s sustained.

Of course, TDPK was trying to paint Stacy McCain as a racist, and that’s nonsense. Furthermore, given some of the racial epithets that TDPK is on record as have said and written, it was particularly unseemly for him to be trying to tar anyone else with that brush.

Even if Stacy or I or any of our codefendants were racist, that had no bearing on whether or not what we said and wrote was true, and TDPK had to prove that our words were false. Stupid is as stupid does, and TDPK tried to bring up racism a second time.

MR. KIMBERLIN: Have you ever been identified as a member of the hate group League of the South?

THE COURT: I’m sorry, what was that, what group?

MR. OSTRONIC: Objection.

MR. KIMBERLIN: League of the South.

THE COURT: League of the South?

MR. KIMBERLIN: It’s like an offshoot of the KKK.

MR. OSTRONIC: Objection, Your Honor.

MR. KIMBERLIN: It believes in —

THE COURT: What’s that relevant to, sir?

MR. KIMBERLIN: Well he brought it up.

THE COURT: He didn’t bring up the League of the South.

MR. KIMBERLIN: Huh?

THE COURT: He didn’t bring up the League of the South.

MR. KIMBERLIN: He talked about he’s not a racist.

THE COURT: Well the fact that he brought it up without objection doesn’t make it relevant. I mean what is the jury going to do with this? We’re not here about whether anybody is a racist or not, are we?

MR. KIMBERLIN: Well no, but he’s tried —

MR. MCCAIN: You’re white by the way.

Never try to outcrazy Stacy McCain.

* * * * *

It was almost worth all the hassle of the Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. LOLsuit to be able to watch Kimberlin destroy his own case by calling Aaron Walker, Ali Alexander, Stacy McCain, and Me at his witnesses. All we had to do to discredit his imagined narrative was to tell the truth. I suppose he was so unfamiliar with the truth that it caught him off guard.

BTW, the foreman of the jury (who was black) had been rolling his eyes as he listened to Kimberlin’s line of questioning, and he chuckled at Stacy’s “You’re white by the way” comment.

Meanwhile back in 2020, it looks as if no one is buying into Kimberlin’s latest false narratives. The @itstime_2020 Twitter account hasn’t seen any new tweets for over a week, and itstie2020 dot org’s global popularity ranking is still below 14,000,000. Also, while other English language Ukrainian news sites (e.g., Unian)  have been covering the Senate report on Hunter Biden’s foreign deals, empr dot media has ignored the story.

The Truth is out there. It’s just not often found on one of Kimberlin’s websites.

Bad Science and Even Worse Theology


The Federalist reports that Nancy Pelosi wants to keep churches closed. When asked to comment on her archbishop’s statement that the state and local governments’ restrictions on worship violate the First Amendment, the Speaker said,

With all due respect to my Archbishop, I think we should follow science on this. And again with faith and science, sometimes they’re countered to each other.

Mrs. Pelosi is wrong in multiple ways in her statement. First, there is less science involved the medical response to the Wuhan virus pandemic than many people imagine. Good medicine, like good engineering, uses scientific knowledge and principles to the extent they are available and applicable to the case at hand, but sometimes a new problem must be dealt with without existing good scientific knowledge available. Guesswork based on experience may or may not give an optimal solution, and some guesses will be wrong. Today’s news about Nashville’s wrongheaded response in closing certain business is just one example of how fallible public health officials, mayors, and governors have been. Continuing to act as if a failed hypothesis is correct in bad science.

Second, while her invocation of science is bad science, her theology is even worse. Without exception, apparent contradictions between what we think we understand from science and theology wind up being caused by a lack of clear understanding of what one or both of them are trying to tell us—or from asking one of them to answer questions about which it has no answers. Science tells us how. Religion tells us why. (See the posts under the Science and the Bible tab in the menu above for more on this point.)

Third, her due respect for the pastoral authority of her Archbishop requires that she submit to his spiritual leadership. If she can not or will not, she has a limited range of options. She can go full Karen and speak with his manager. The Pope would probably take her phone call. (Come to think of it, she might even get support from Pope Francis.) Her other honest choice is to leave the Catholic Church. I expect she will do neither.

The voters of San Francisco are getting what they voted for. Good and hard.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day


Brett Kimberlin made a big mistake by trying to silence bloggers through lawfare. He was quasi-successful with his attack on Seth Allen, but going after Aaron Walker stirred up too many free speech bloggers, including me. That brought too many eyes looking his way. However, his worst mistake may have been picking on me. He did it at a time when I had retired and could devote full time to defending against his LOLsuits and bogus criminal complaints. Even though I’m now working again, I’ve continued to keep an eye on him.

One of the tools I’ve used throughout my coverage of Kimberlin’s failing attempts at reputation management is humor. The TKPOTD from three years ago is one example of such ridicule.

* * * * *

The month of August is off to a good start, but we may have a few days of behind-the-scenes activity during the coming week.

The Gentle Reader may wish to take the opportunity to stock up on popcorn.

Meanwhile, I seem to be all out of bubble gum.

* * * * *

Yes, I’m still keeping an eye on Kimberlin, and I have lots of tools to do so.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day


This TKPOTD is from four years ago today. It provides a succinct summary of Brett Kimberlin’s lawfare campaign attempting to use the courts to suppress the First Amendment rights of his critics.

* * * * *

One of the subjects of interest at this blog is the First Amendment. I got interested in Brett Kimberlin back in 2012 because of the unconstitutional gag order he was granted against Aaron Walker as part of a peace order. That struck me as an attack on Aaron’s First Amendment rights, and I wound up participating in the Everyone Blog About Brett Kimberlin Day blogburst. Because the hearings involved in the Kimberlin cases were within commuting distance of my home, I began attending them and writing about the various Kimberlin-related peace order petitions and lawsuits.

As a result, I became part of the story.

In late July, 2013, Brett Kimberlin filed a false criminal complaint against me accusing me of harassment. The charge was dropped by the Montgomery County State’s Attorney.

In late August, 2013, Brett Kimberlin sued Aaron Walker, Stacy McCain, Ali Akbar, Kimberlin Unmasked, and me in Montgomery County Circuit Court alleging a wide array of torts, including defamation and false light invasion of privacy. In July, 2014, most of that case was dismissed on summary judgment. The next month, Aaron, Stacy, Ali, and I received a directed verdict in our favor when Kimberlin was unable to put on enough evidence to allow the remaining case to go to the jury. Kimberlin appealed to the Court of Special Appeals, and a three-judge panel upheld the Circuit Court’s finding in January, 2016. Kimberlin has asked an rehearing en banc by the entire Court of Special Appeals.

In October, 2013, Brett Kimberlin sued over twenty defendants, including me, in federal court alleging a RICO conspiracy and civil rights claims as well as a laundry list of state law torts. On 17 March, 2015, the federal claims were throw out, except for one claim against Patrick Frey. Kimberlin tried to appeal to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, but he was turned away because the case was still ongoing in the lower court. The remnant portion of the case has been limping along, and discovery finally ended last Friday. Kimberlin has sought to subpoena information from me, but I was not properly served. However, I voluntarily let him have the responsive information that I had. Because he was disappointed with what he received, he filed a motion to have me sanctioned. That motion is still pending.

In March, 2015, Kimberlin filed a false peace order petition against me that alleged I had harassed Mrs. Kimberlin’s elder daughter. On 13 March, 2015, that petition was denied.

The following Monday, 16 March, 2015, Kimberlin filed his second RICO lawsuit, the so-called Team Themis suit, against almost twenty defendants. My name was tacked on the end. (This was great timing; the first RICO suit was dismissed the next day.) That lawsuit was dismissed last week.

On 15 April, 2015, Kimberlin filed another lawsuit in Montgomery County Circuit Court which essentially was the state law claims from his first federal RICO suit alleged against most of the same defendants. Michelle Malkin, Twitchy, Breitbart, Glenn Beck, Mercury Radio Arts, and The Blaze were dismissed from the suit in September, 2015. Aaron Walker was dismissed in January, 2016. Dan Backer, DB Capitol Services, Lee Stranahan, and I were dismissed yesterday. Of the four remaining defendants, Patrick Frey, Ali Akbar, and National Bloggers Club remain unserved, and Mandy Nagy is incompetent to defend herself following a devastating stroke.

Kimberlin appealed the denial of his bogus peace order petition, and his appeal was denied after a hearing in Montgomery County Circuit Court on 14 May, 2015.

A few days later, acting through his wife, Kimberlin filed a false criminal complaint based on the allegations in his peace order petition. In June, 2015, the Montgomery County State’s Attorney dropped the charge for lack of evidence.

So where are the cases now.

The peace orders and criminal charges are done.

The first state lawsuit has failed on appeal, and it’s unlikely that the Court of Special Appeals will bother with an en banc hearing and even more unlikely that the Court of Appeal (Maryland’s highest court) would grant a petition for certiorari and take the case.

The first RICO case isn’t over in the District Court and can’t be appealed until the claim against Patrick Frey is adjudicated there.

The second RICO is in now toast in the District Court. I expect that Kimberlin will file an appeal with the Fourth Circuit in a few days.

The second state lawsuit isn’t over yet either, and it can’t be appealed until the claims against the remaining four defendants are resolved.

So, for now, Patrick Ostronic, my pro bono attorney in the state cases, will be watching the Court of Special Appeals for a decision on an further hearing, and I’m lining up legal resources to deal with the expected appeal in RICO 2. And we shall see how Judge Hazel rules on that sanctions motion. Meanwhile, it’s become abundantly clear that the Rauhauser/Kimberlin strategy of on-the-cheap pro se litigation has backfired.

We’re dealing with people who have likely had no interaction with the court system beyond a traffic ticket; the potential for a pro se litigant to force them into expensive, long distance, lengthy, discovery laden litigation doesn’t seem to cross their minds.

—Neal Rauhauser, quoted by Stacy McCain.

Kimberlin now overlooks at his own risk the potential for a group of defendants, some with excellent legal resources, dedicated to the First Amendment to push back against his lawfare. Maybe, just maybe, he’ll begin to understand the potential costs of taking on dedicated pro se defendants with time and resources.

#Loser

* * * * *

Loser indeed. Not only did The Dread Deadbeat Pro-Se Kimberlin wind up losing all those cases and their appeals, he wound up having appeals court costs taxed to himself and getting sanctioned for frivolously including me as an appellee in one of the appeals. Oh, and he lost his RICO 3 Lolsuit that he filed agains Breitbart Holdings, Steve Bannon, and a long list of other defendants when it was dismissed sua sponte by the District Court. His LOLsuit against Mitch McConnell and Chuck Grassley was also dismissed sua sponte, and he lost all the appeals related to those case.

Everything proceeded as I had foreseen.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day


This episode of Blognet from five years ago today deals with the early stages of a case that resulted in quite a few episodes.

* * * * *

BlognetTitleCardMUSIC: Theme. Intro and fade under.

NARRATOR: Ladies and gentlemen, the story you are about to hear is true. The names have been changed to protect the innocent.

MUSIC: Up, then under …

NARRATOR: You’re a Detective Sergeant. You’re assigned to Internet Detail. Bloggers are being harassed by a convicted terrorist who is suing them for writing about his past. Nothing they’ve written appears to be false, but there is a gap in the terrorists bio. Your job … investigate.

MUSIC: Up then under …

ANNOUNCER: Blognet … the documented drama of an actual case. For the next few minutes, in cooperation with the Twitter Town Sheriff’s Department, you will travel step by step on the side of the good guys through an actual case transcribed from official files. From beginning to end, from crime to punishment, Blognet is the story of the good guys in action.

MUSIC: Up and out. Continue reading

Copyright Trolling


The time I would have spent drafting a post for today was spent doing research to support a fellow blogger who is being threatened with a lawsuit by a copyright troll. Almost seven years ago, the blogger linked to a story at a major newspaper’s website, including a photo from the story. Years later, the photographer is trying to extort money out of the blogger for use of the image.

First of all, such a link is most likely an example of Fair Use.

Even if it weren’t, research indicates that the photographer may have failed to timely file for registration of the copyright on the image. IANAL, but it’s my understanding that such  a defective registration means that the copyright holder is only entitled to the actual damages he suffered. Statutory damages are off the table. Indeed, I believe that a reasonable argument can be made that the blogger’s linking to the newspaper’s article created additional traffic to the story and enhanced the value of the photo. Thus, the photographer received a benefit from the link rather than suffering any damage. His case is nonsense.

Copyright trolls need to be dealt with swiftly and firmly.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day


One of the benefits of following The Saga of Team Kimberlin has been the friendships that I have developed with my various codefendants, some of whom I got to know before we were sued and I was simply covering the First-Amendment-related story of The Dread Deadbeat Pro-Se Kimberlin’s use of lawfare to punish people who told the truth about him. Stacy McCain is one of those friends, and the TKPOTD from four years ago today dealt with TDPK’s foolish attempts to out-crazy Stacy.

* * * * *

Back in June of 2014, Judge Hazel ordered The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin to serve copies of the Second Amended Complaint in his Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO Madness on all the defendants. He never bothered to serve Aaron Walker, Stacy McCain, Ali Akbar, the National Bloggers Club, or me during the 120 days allowed for service.

Aaron and I have been proactively engaging with TPDK and his court filings. Stacy elected to wait until he was served with the intention of responding within the 14 day window after service. TDPK never served him, so Stacy never responded.

popcorn4bkBrett Kimberlin tired to outcrazy Stacy McCain while he had him on the witness stand during the Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. trial. He failed miserably, but he didn’t learn his lesson.

He’s now seeking a default judgment against Stacy when, as Stacy so ably put it “Plaintiff hasn’t even bothered to provide a bad forgery of such alleged service.” Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) failure to serve within 120 day is grounds for mandatory dismissal. Also, TDPK was ordered by the Court to effect service. Failure to obey that order is grounds for dismissal under Rule 41(b).

All TDPK had to do was mail Stacy a copy of the SAC.

All Stacy had to do was wait.

* * * * *

Going after Stacy was clearly more that Kimberlin could handle, and TDPK dropped Stacy as a defendant in Kimberlin v. National Bloggers Club, et al. (II), the state RICO Retread LOLsuit.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day


One of the dumbest things Brett Kimberlin has done during his campaign of lawfare was to use Bill Schmalfeldt as one of his PR mouthpieces. Aside from his incompetence, Schmalfeldt personal legal problems became a massive source of pointage, laughery, and mockification that damaged the Team Kimberlin brand. Schmalfeldt’s misbehavior resulted in his receiving a dozen restraining orders issued in five states. One was issued to protect a three-year-old child.

Here are a couple of posts from four years ago today that dealt with Schmalfeldt’s inability to obey one of those court orders. The first was a Legal LULZ Du Jour. The second was a Prevarication Du Jour.

* * * * *

NQ01601211819ZIf the Cabin Boy™ were to bother to read his copy of the stalking no contact order issued against him on behalf of Patrick Grady, he would see that he is forbidden from communicating “to or about” Mr. Grady. NCO_b1It may be that Cook County is interested in seeing that the orders of its courts are obeyed. BTW, Wisconsin recognizes out-of-state orders as enforceable in Wisconsin.

* * * * *

NQ201601212145ZNo, I don’t hate the First Amendment. I believe that prior restraint on publication generally is prohibited by the First Amendment, and the Supreme Court agrees with me. See New York Times v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971), also known as The Pentagon Papers Case.

However, I do believe that it is possible for someone to do something that can result in the loss of some or almost all of his rights. For example, a felony conviction will put an end to a person’s Second Amendment right to own a modern firearm. A jail sentence ends someone’s right to travel as he pleases. Thus, it may be that a finding by a court that one has used his speech to violate the rights of another can cause a loss of some of the violator’s First Amendment rights. IANAL, and I haven’t read much case law in the area, but I wouldn’t be surprised to find that the Illinois stalking no contact order law is valid.

* * * * *

Schmalfeldt should have spent more time invoking his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent. IIRC, the last of the restrain orders has expired, so his First Amendment right to speak is unfettered. But now it seems that nobody is listening.

Karma is a bitch.

On Being Dangerous


The men in primitive human societies are the hunters and warriors. As such, they must be dangerous. They must be capable of the violence necessary to harvest game and to protect their tribe, but they must restrain their violence in order to be cooperative members of the tribe. That ability to act with restraint in one of the marks of a proper adult male human being. Indeed, as we have become more “civilized,” that restraint and cooperation have become even more necessary to allow large societies to function smoothly.

The attendees at the pro-second-amendment rally in Richmond today were mostly men, and the peace and calm reflected in their behavior is an example of mature restraint.

It’s a bit early yet, but it seems that there is a great deal of disappointment in certain quarters because the rally was peaceful. There seems to have been an expectation that mature men would act like spoiled children and have some sort of hissy fit because they weren’t getting their way.

The governor and legislature in Virginia are on a path that could take them beyond the point where peaceful protest of their actions is no longer appropriate, but they aren’t there. Yet. Perhaps, they will reconsider their unwise attack on Second Amendment rights, but it may be that they won’t. If they persist, many Virginians may be inspired by these words written by the second governor of Virginia—

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Now, one peaceful way of handling such a situation would be recall elections, but the legislature is moving to make recall more difficult. If they unfairly game the political process, they should not be surprised if other means are sought.

There are times when it justified for dangerous men to be dangerous.

UPDATE—Seen on Gab—

When Overreach Starts to Fail


Nancy Pelosi allowed the forces on her left wing to go a bridge too far. She tried to find a way to salvage the House Impeachment Hoax, but she’s been outmaneuvered by Cocaine Mitch. The mopping up action will begin in the Senate next week, and the hapless PR skirmishing by the Maddows in The Media will not save The Narrative.

Meanwhile in Virginia, Governor Blackface and his friends in the Legislature are pushing ahead with California/New York style gun control. As anyone who has looked at a map of those Second Amendment sanctuaries can see, the proposed laws have little popular support outside of the DC suburbs and a few urban areas. The legislature has responded to public unrest by changing its rules in order to be make lobbying by gun control supporters more difficult and by moving to change the law related to recalling public officials. The governor plans an emergency declaration to prevent the carrying of firearms at a pro-Second-Amendment rally. These are not the acts of fair-minded politicians seeking to do the will of their constituents.

We see the system of checks and balances envisioned by The Founders working in the case of the Impeachment Hoax. We see it apparently failing in Virginia. I doubt Madison or Jefferson would be pleased with their home state today.

President Trump will face an election, and the voters will either keep him for another term or fire him.

Virginia … well, the state’s motto is sic semper tyrannis, so let’s hope that cooler, wiser heads prevail.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day


One of the reasons that I (sort of) jokingly refer to Team Kimberlin getting their legal advice from the same outfit that sells stuff to Wile E. Coyote is that the theories they advance are usually as harebrained and effective as all those fine Acme products. Six years ago, I became the first of several individuals to hold Bill Schmalfeldt accountable for his online harassment, and he spent most of 2013 trying to figure out how to get that first peace order issued against him set aside. This Prevarication Du Jour from six years ago today dealt with one of his failed approaches.

* * * * *

ftrrnews201310092359ZDoes Eugene Volokh agree with Bill Schmalfeldt’s interpretation of U. S. v. Cassidy? Well, it’s certainly true that Prof. Volokh agrees that writing about someone on the Internet is protected speech. But how about writing to someone? I’ll let the good professor speak for himself. Here’s what he had to say when writing about the patently unconstitutional peace order Brett Kimberlin secured against Aaron Walker last year, an order that forbade Mr. Walker from writing about Kimberlin—

The old narrow restrictions might well be constitutional (see, e.g., Rowan v. U.S. Post Office Department), but precisely because they deal with essentially one-to-one speech — restricting such unwanted speech to an unwilling listener leaves the speaker free to keep talking to other, potentially willing listeners.

Of course, it is just that sort of one-to-one speech that the Cabin Boy engaged in after being asked to stop which violated Maryland’s harassment law. Prof. Volokh also notes that

[p]erhaps a specific statute that bars the deliberate sending of one-to-one messages to a person who has asked that the messages stop, or who would otherwise clearly be substantially distressed by the messages, might be constitutional.

So it looks as if Prof. Volokh might agree that old-fashioned harassment statutes apply to behavior on the Internet just as they do in the real world. Perhaps the Cabin Boy should ask Eugene Volokh to file an amicus brief.

* * * * *

In fact, Eugene Volokh did wind up filing an amicus brief in one of the Kimberlin case. He filed it in support of Aaron Walker, and as I understand his brief, he agrees with the point of view I expressed in my post.

Some More Gilmore v. Jones, et al. News


Brennan Gilmore was present at the Charlottesville riot in 2017. He recorded a car being driven into a crowd that resulted in the death of a women, and he posted that video online. He also made appearance in the news media discussing what he saw. As a result, Gilmore and his video became a topic of controversy, and Gilmore was upset with some of the commentary. He has sued Alex Jones and a host of others for defamation in federal court. When the judge in the case denied most of the motions to dismiss, two separate groups of defendants filed motions for reconsideration or for an interlocutory appeal of the dismissals to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

The judge has granted a motion certifying an interlocutory appeal of the following question:

Where an online journalist or publisher with a national audience purposefully and primarily focuses their coverage underlying the suit-related conduct on forum-state events and persons, is such conduct sufficient for a forum court to assert specific personal jurisdiction over that journalist or publisher?

I found footnote 1 interesting.

However this question is limited, the Fourth Circuit may nevertheless review uncertified issues contained within the Court’s order on Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss. “[W]e would not necessarily be limited to only those questions expressly or implicitly identified as ‘controlling’ by the district court; under § 1292(b), appeal is from the order certified, not from particular rulings embodied within it.” Fannin v. CSX Transp., Inc., 873 F.2d 1438, 1989 WL 42583, at *3 (4th Cir. 1989) (unpublished).

IANAL, but seems as if the judge in taking note that the defendants could raise other issues related to the motions to dismiss beside the certified question in their appeals.

This could be interesting.

Gilmore v. Jones, et al. News


It’s been about two years since Brennan Gilmore filed a defamation suit in the U. S. District Court in Charlottesville, Virginia, against Alex Jones and a non-related group of defendants. Earlier this year, the judge ruled against most of the defendants’ motions to dismiss (Allen West’s motion was granted), and all but one of the remaining defendants then filed motions for reconsideration or for an interlocutory appeal to a higher court to resolve disputed matters of law. Those motions were fully briefed, so the court scheduled a hearing to consider them on 5 September. However, the court gave notice last week that it would rule on the motions based on the written briefs and that the hearing was cancelled.

Since the briefs were filed, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals has issued a ruling that bears on when a district court must certify a question for an interlocutory appeal. The lawyer representing several of the defendants had planned to bring that ruling to the court’s attention during the hearing. Because he will no longer have that opportunity, he has filed a motion to be allowed to supplement his brief.