Judge dismisses Trump’s Russia collusion lawsuit against Hillary Clinton with stinging rebuke
The judge slammed the "audacity of plaintiff's legal theories and the manner in which they clearly contravene binding case law."
The Facts Inside Our Reporter’s Notebook
A federal judge in Florida has dismissed former President Donald Trump’s lawsuit alleging Hillary Clinton, the FBI and others colluded to contrive Russia allegations against him during the 2016 campaign, offering a stinging rebuke to the lawsuit’s length and legal reasoning.
"Plaintiff's Amended Complaint is neither short nor plain, and it certainly does not establish that Plaintiff is entitled to any relief," wrote U.S. District Judge Donald Middlebrooks, appointed to the court by former President Bill Clinton.
"More troubling, the claims presented in the Amended Complaint are not warranted under existing law," he also said in his 65-page ruling Thursday. "In fact, they are foreclosed by existing precedent, including decisions of the Supreme Court."
Middlebrooks was the judge who ruled against George W. Bush in the Florida elections dispute in 2000, and was overruled by the US Supreme Court
The judge slammed the "audacity of Plaintiff's legal theories and the manner in which they clearly contravene binding case law" and said he was dismissing the case against the private defendants, including Hillary Clinton and dossier-offer Christopher Steele firm, with prejudice, meaning the tort cannot be refiled.
Middlebrooks also indicated he might consider a request for sanctions against Trump’s lawyers for filing a suit.
"I reserve jurisdiction to adjudicate issues pertaining to sanctions," he wrote.
The judge also agreed with the arguments made by Clinton and the other defendants that Trump's claims were past the statute of limitations and that they have "no merit as a lawsuit."
"What the Amended Complaint lacks in substance and legal support it seeks to substitute with length, hyperbole, and the settling of scores and grievances," the judge said of the 193-page complaint.
Middlebrooks concluded his decision by stating, "At its core, the problem with Plaintiff's Amended Complaint is that Plaintiff is not attempting to seek redress for any legal harm; instead, he is seeking to flaunt a two-hundred-page political manifesto outlining his grievances against those that have opposed him, and this Court is not the appropriate forum."