United States District Court, W.D. Kentucky, Louisville Division
Rebecca Grady Jennings, District Judge
action was opened by pro se Petitioner when he filed
a “Notice of Removal” in this Court apparently of
a state-court criminal case against him. As set forth below,
this action will be dismissed.
Notice of Removal states at the top of the first page that it
was directed to the Clerk of the Jefferson County District
Court and the Clerk of this Court. It is unclear to this
Court what the purpose of the filing is, but it is clear that
it bears the hallmarks of sovereign-citizen theory. The top
of each page is captioned: “Treaty of Peace and
Friendship of 1787 between the Empire of Morocco and the
United States.” The document states:
Moorsare not, nor ever have been, a
‘14th amendment Citizen' of the U.S.
Corporation company . . . The United States is a Federal
Corporation, not a country . . . all issues or disputes
between Moors and united States citizens must be litigated
within federal courts with prescribed jurisdiction . . . Any
further issues or disputes that the State Courts or other
U.S. Citizens may have be litigated in federal court with
consuls from the Morroccan/Moorish nation present.
document also refers to the Uniform Commercial Code
first page of the document, reference is made to a presumably
Kentucky state court case captioned Commonwealth v.
Williamson, Antonia D., with case number
“19-T-036340.” However, the document appears to
be signed by “Nazir Bey” and declares him to be
“A Free Moorish American national and citizen of the
free National Government of Morocco” in honor of his
“Moabite ancestors to time immemorial, exercising the
Divine and Common-Law-Right to Jus Postiliminii, in accord
with the high principles of Love, Truth, Peace, Freedom and
Justice.” The return address of the envelop is Nazir
Abdullah Bey with an address in “Louisville, Kentucky
Republic.” Attached is a “Writ of Prohibitio,
” which asserts that this Court has jurisdiction of any
dispute with “Moorish American national Nazir Abdullah
Bey, distinguished from and not to be identified as, nor held
as surety for, WILLIAMSON ANTONIA D.” and that
“Moorish Consuls must be present.” The document
contains a “seal” emblazoned with “Rise of
the Moors[;] Office Seal.”
district court “may, at any time, sua sponte
dismiss a complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction
pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure when the allegations of a complaint are totally
implausible, attenuated, unsubstantial, frivolous, devoid of
merit, or no longer open to discussion.” Apple v.
Glenn, 183 F.3d 477, 479 (6th Cir. 1999). The premise of
the instant action is clearly based on “sovereign
citizen” theories, which have “been uniformly
rejected by the federal courts” for decades. See,
e.g., Smith v. Heyns, No. 13-14013, 2014 WL
3687119, at *1 n.1 (E.D. Mich. July 24, 2014).
“Sovereign citizen” arguments “have not
only been rejected by the courts, but also recognized as
frivolous and a waste of court resources.” Muhammad
v. Smith, No. 3:13-CV-760 MAD/DEP, 2014 WL 3670609, at
*2 (N.D.N.Y. July 23, 2014). Claims based on “sovereign
citizen” theories may be dismissed without
“extended argument” as patently frivolous.
United States v. Ward, No. 98-30191, 1999 WL 369812,
at *2 (9th Cir. May 13, 1999); see also United States v.
McQuarters, No. 11-MC-51386, 2013 WL 6095514, at *2
(E.D. Mich. Nov. 20, 2013).
the Court finds that this action meets the standard set forth
in Apple v. Glenn. Therefore, this action must be
dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under
Court will enter a separate Order dismissing the instant
action for the reasons stated herein.