Thornton-Bey v. Administrative Office of the United States Courts
This text of Thornton-Bey v. Administrative Office of the United States Courts (Thornton-Bey v. Administrative Office of the United States Courts) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
FILED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SEP 1 5 2010 D@FUAN B- THORNTON-BEY» éi'.‘i{i; §’¢Ft»,‘i‘%‘l§¥ti‘ii?'&'§,'.'i.‘.’n‘?,’.'a Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF .
THE UNITED STATES COURTS, et al. , 15 4 Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff s application to proceed in forma pauperis and pro se complaint. The application will be granted and the complaint will be dismissed.
Plaintiff alleges that the Administrative Offrce of the United States Courts and the United States Department of Justice failed to have proper oaths of office taken by The Hon. Ann C. Williams, Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, and The Hon. John W. Darrah, Judge of the United States District Court for the Northem District of Illinois. Compl. at 2. He states that Judge Darrah sentenced him to a 32 year term of imprisonrnent, and that Judge Williams issued two rulings against him on motions filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Id. at 3. Plaintiff demands an investigation and the judges’ impeachment. Ia'.
The decision to pursue a criminal investigation or to prosecute a criminal case rests with the executive branch of government, see United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683, 693 (l974) (acknowledging that the Executive Branch "has exclusive authority and absolute discretion to decide whether to prosecute a case"), and only the United States Senate may impeach a federal
judge, U.S. CONST. art. I, § 3, cl. 6; see Nixon v. United States, 506 U.S. 224, 229 (l993).
Therefore, a district court "cannot compel the U.S. Congress or President to impeach any federal
judge or to prosecute any federal judge." Miller Famz`ly v. President of U.S., No. C 98-4441 SI (PR), 1998 WL 841611, at *l (N.D. Cal. Dec. 2, l998) (dismissing as frivolous a prisoner’s petition for a writ of mandamus which, among other relief, demanded the impeachment and prosecution of the Ninth Circuit judges who heard his appeal).
The Court will dismiss this action because the complaint fails to state a claim upon which
relief can be granted. See 28 U.S.C. §§ l9l5(e)(2)(B)(ii), l9l5A(b)(l). An Order consistent
with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.
/%MW~@ZT
United States District Judge
DATE; ;;/‘;(/(0
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Thornton-Bey v. Administrative Office of the United States Courts, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thornton-bey-v-administrative-office-of-the-united-dcd-2010.