United States of America We The People Minnesota, The v. State of Minnesota

Background

The plaintiffs filed a petition for a preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order. A preliminary injunction is a court order issued before a final decision that seeks to preserve a situation or prevent certain conduct; a temporary restraining order is a similar emergency order, generally sought on an expedited basis. The filing did not include a complaint.

Procedural defects

The court identified several problems with the filing. Under the District of Minnesota’s local rules, a party seeking emergency injunctive relief must contact the judge’s courtroom deputy before filing to obtain a hearing date and briefing schedule. The plaintiffs did not do so. The court also said the plaintiffs failed to file most of the materials required for a temporary restraining order, including a motion, hearing notice, legal memorandum, affidavits and exhibits, and proposed order.

The court further stated that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65 required the plaintiffs to provide notice of the emergency motion to the defendants or explain in writing the efforts made to provide notice and why notice should not be required. The court found no reason to believe this requirement had been met.

No complaint and connection to requested relief

The court emphasized that a party seeking a preliminary injunction must show a relationship between the injury described in the motion and the conduct described in the complaint. That connection could not be shown because the plaintiffs had not filed a complaint. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 3, a civil action begins by filing a complaint. The court therefore stated that the case should not have been opened in the absence of one.

Disposition

The court ordered that the matter be administratively terminated, meaning the court closed the action administratively rather than deciding the claims. The clerk was directed to refund the plaintiffs’ $402 filing fee. The court expressly stated that none of the plaintiffs’ claims had been decided on the merits and that the plaintiffs were not barred from returning to federal court to raise those claims in a proceeding properly started with a complaint.

The court also advised that a non-attorney plaintiff may represent only himself or herself and may not bring claims for other people, including minor children, or for entities that are not people. The court further stated that the petition appeared to seek an order stopping Minnesota from prosecuting the plaintiffs for alleged criminal-law violations. It warned that federal courts generally must not interfere with ongoing state criminal proceedings because of principles requiring respect for state courts and governments. These advisories were not separate merits rulings on the plaintiffs’ claims.