“Court Issues Rare Ruling: Man Prohibited from Suing Supreme Court Justices”
A federal judge in California has issued an unusual ruling prohibiting Joseph Scott Alter from filing any further lawsuits against U.S. Supreme Court justices without prior court approval. Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California designated Alter a “vexatious litigant,” citing his history of filing frivolous lawsuits against conservative justices, including Neil Gorsuch, Samuel Alito, and Amy Coney Barrett.
This ruling follows Alter’s fourth lawsuit, in which he sought both declaratory and injunctive relief against several sitting justices, primarily driven by grievances over recent Supreme Court rulings. Notably, Alter objected to the Court’s decision in 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis (2023), claiming it violated his civil rights and requesting a billion-dollar settlement, along with injunctions to prevent further decisions by the justices.
In his ruling, Judge Aenlle-Rocha pointed out that Alter’s dissatisfaction with prior court decisions—especially those dismissing his claims due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction—did not provide valid grounds for his repetitive and baseless lawsuits. He emphasized that Alter’s grievances did not warrant further court actions.
“Plaintiff’s dissatisfaction and disagreement with prior courts’ rulings…does not constitute valid grounds to bring frivolous actions in federal court repeatedly,” the judge stated.
The ruling also highlighted how Alter’s lawsuits not only lack merit but also impose an unnecessary burden on the judicial system, delaying other important cases. As a result, Alter is now required to obtain written authorization from a district or magistrate judge before submitting any future complaints against the justices.
Alter has until April 2024 to respond in writing, explaining why he should not be added to the California courts’ vexatious litigant list, which would further restrict his ability to file lawsuits. If he fails to respond or if the court rejects his arguments, he may face additional limitations, including prefiling orders that mandate judicial approval for any future lawsuits.
While Alter’s lawsuits have attracted attention for their unconventional nature, they also reflect a growing public discontent with the Supreme Court. A recent Gallup poll from July 2024 revealed that public confidence in the Court is at historic lows, with only 40% of Americans expressing trust in the institution and disapproval reaching a record-high 58%. The poll also showed a stark divide in approval: 66% of Republicans approved of the Court, compared to just 15% of Democrats, while 44% of independents expressed approval.
As scrutiny of the Supreme Court intensifies, Alter’s case serves as a reminder of the complexities surrounding public perception and the judicial system.
