Baker v. U. S. Senate

• Court: District Court, District of Columbia
• Decided: November 18, 2010
• Docket: Civil Action No. 2010-1977
• Status: Published

Opinion

FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NO'J \ 8 2010 FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA o' trlct & Bankruptcy Clerk, u'Stl\' ISOistrict ot Columbia courts tor e

JOHNP. BAKER, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action NolO 1977 ) u.s. SENATE, et al., ) ) Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court on plaintiff s application to proceed in forma pauperis and

pro se complaint. The Court will grant the application, and dismiss the complaint.

Plaintiff alleges that the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996

("AEDP A") violates the United States Constitution by setting a time limit within which a

prisoner must seek habeas relief. He demands an Order directing the Congress to repeal these

measures and directing the United States District Court for the District of Arizona to review his

habeas petition. Even if this Court were authorized to grant the relief petitioner demands and if

the defendants were amenable to suit, his complaint must be dismissed.

The Supreme Court has held that the AEDPA "does not preclude [its review of] an

application for habeas corpus relief, although it does affect the standards governing the granting

of such relief," Felker v. Turpin, 518 U.S. 651, 654 (1996), and "[t]he added restrictions which

the [AEDPA] places on second habeas petitions ... do not amount to a 'suspension' of the writ

contrary to Article I, § 9" of the United States Constitution, id. at 664. 1 Because the complaint

"The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it." U.S. CONST. art. I, § 9, cl. 2. fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, it must be dismissed. See 28 U.S.C. §

1915A(b)(1).

An Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

DATE: tb ~ ZoIO