Former Government Official Suing Snowden And Others For Billions Of Dollars Adds The United States As An Involuntary Plaintiff

from the JOHN-and-JANE-DOES-1-316,000,000 dept

Remember when former Kansas Secretary of Transportation Horace Edwards filed a multi-billion dollar lawsuit against Edward Snowden, Laura Poitras and others connected to the CitizenFour documentary "on behalf of the American people?" And remember when plenty of American people said, "STFU Edwards, you don't speak for me?"

Well, suck it, dissenters. Horace Edwards has other plans for you.

Horace Edwards, the retired naval officer who last month sued the makers and distributors of Citizenfour, has filed an amended complaint that names the "United States of America" as a putative involuntary plaintiff.
That's everyone. Of course, you need not lawyer up, because even though you are included under the plaintiff "United States of America" (and "John and Jane Does 1-10"), you won't actually be involved. Your country's name will be invoked, but you'll have nothing to do with it. This will all be in the government's hands, with "all" most likely being a motion to be removed from the plaintiff list.

As Eriq Gardner at The Hollywood Reporter point out, the government may invoke "sovereign immunity" to unhitch itself from Edwards' crazy train. It's worked before.

On the bright side, the government will be forced to offer some sort of input on this issue. It has remained mostly silent about Snowden's ongoing freedom, even as leaked documents continue to be published. Its filing in response to Edwards' amended complaint will hopefully give us a little insight into its current level of antipathy towards the former systems administrator. Of course, it could also limit its remarks to "This is ridiculous," before asking the judge to press the "Unsubscribe" button.

There's also the question of standing that still surrounds Edwards' lawsuit. He appears to be trying to address that both with his addition of the USA to plaintiffs' list, as well as other alterations to the body of the complaint. [pdf link]

Another sentence has been added to paragraph 29 in an attempt to shore up Edwards' assertion that the Kansas District Court is the proper venue for this lawsuit. (Added sentence in bold.)
29. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331, 28 U.S.C. § 1361, and 28 U.S. C. § 1332(a)(1). Defendants purposely availed themselves of the privilege of conducting business within this State and this district as well as committing wrongful, tortious acts causing harm to Plaintiff[s] herein.
There's also this entirely new paragraph that very briefly lays out Edwards' legal theory as to the USA's "interest" in this case.
32. The United States of America, upon information and belief, has an interest in Count II as a Real Party In Interest under the federal common law theory of constructive trust.
This is followed 20+ paragraphs later by an all-new section [COUNT II (CONSTRUCTIVE TRUST FOR BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY AS TO UNITED STATES OF AMERICA)] that is completely dedicated to the surprise appearance of an entire country as a potential plaintiff. It's a shorter rehash of Count I that limits its allegations to what Snowden "did" directly to the US government, including the violation of sworn statements and contractual obligations, etc.

Now, Edwards doesn't want CitizenFour censored or banned. He just wants every cent anyone makes from it dumped into a trust fund to "repay" the government for all the "damage" the leaks have caused, hopefully to the tune of a couple billion dollars. Oh, and to have CitizenFour declared ineligible for the Oscars.
Last month, Lamfers attempted to get the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences to disqualify Citizenfour from Oscar consideration, citing a significant portion of the documentary appearing in a non-theatrical medium (The Guardian's website) prior to the film's theatrical release. After reviewing the situation, the Academy rejected it and deemed the film Oscar-eligible.
I guess one way to deal with disappointment is to add an entire country as an involuntary plaintiff.


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 16 Jan 2015 @ 9:59am

    I didn't know you could do that

    I'm going to sue Techdirt and attach the entire known universe as a involuntary plaintiff. Oh and God too.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    metalliqaz (profile), 16 Jan 2015 @ 10:03am

    The only good thing...

    The only good thing about crotchety old goons like this guy is that you don't have to deal with their crap for very long. They tend to die out and take their stubborn, out-dated, and repulsive ideas with them.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Bt Garner (profile), 16 Jan 2015 @ 10:06am

    I just do not understand the logic here...bad things were done by the US Government. A private citizen blew the whistle on them, so now a person wants to sue the whistle blower to repay the US government the cost of cleaning up the mess, a mess that would not exist had the US Government not done anything bad in the first place. Have I got that right?

    I do fully understand that logic is not the issue here; this is a lawsuit being made for more of an anti-liberal attack than anything else. But how blinded by your own ideals do you have to be to go to this length? Probably about as blind as the US Government was to its own misdeeds.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Michael, 16 Jan 2015 @ 10:07am

    When I sue people, I attach them to the suit as an involuntary plaintiff against themselves. That way, they have to pay double the legal fees.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 16 Jan 2015 @ 10:11am

    Does this mean that every judge has to recuse themselves from this case as a conflict of interest issue?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    balaknair (profile), 16 Jan 2015 @ 10:17am

    Am I missing something or is Mr.Edwards suing the American people on behalf of the American people?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Yum Yum, 16 Jan 2015 @ 10:24am

    Hey Robin, here's another one for you.

    Another attention-seeking moron crawls free from under a rock. Now for the latest headlines from Fox News.....

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    DigDug, 16 Jan 2015 @ 10:26am

    Whistleblower Protection Act...

    There - nuff said - sorry Charlie.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    lucidrenegade (profile), 16 Jan 2015 @ 10:46am

    Where is Soylent Green when you need it?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 16 Jan 2015 @ 11:58am

    Are they foreign citizens

    If Poitras and team are foreign nationals, he can rail all he wants. They have no legal jurisdiction over them. Time to put my "ill-gotten gains" in a Cayman account.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 16 Jan 2015 @ 12:12pm

    I'm going to sue Techdirt and attach the entire known universe as a involuntary plaintiff. Oh and God too.

    While as a representative of the universe as a whole I object to the universe being included, as an Atheist, I lack standing to object on the inclusion of God.

    However, I expect God, King of kings and Lord of hosts, to invoke Sovereign Immunity.

    Good luck on your suit.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 16 Jan 2015 @ 2:22pm

    Wow, if anything I think people should support him in trying to intertwine the people of the United States and the government as a whole into this lawsuit. It would be great if it would force the government to make a statement on exactly what they believe Snowden has damaged.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    alanbleiweiss (profile), 16 Jan 2015 @ 3:39pm

    Where do I sign up to be "John Doe 7"? I'd enjoy being referred to as John Doe #7.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Sheogorath (profile), 16 Jan 2015 @ 4:27pm

    New lawsuit

    United States of America and John and Jane Does 1-10 v Horace Edwards. Basically, you should sue the guy on the basis that he ignored your statements of "not in my name". Simples!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 17 Jan 2015 @ 6:11am

    I know it should be Edwards v. Snowden, but

    Edwards v Edward has a good ring, don't you think?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    bdj, 19 Jan 2015 @ 11:34am

    As the article points out, Horace Edwards is a /retired naval officer/ who thinks this is a good idea. Let that marinate for a while...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer
Anonymous number for texting and calling from Hushed. $25 lifetime membership, use code TECHDIRT25
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.