32. What is the President's best argument in support of his motion to dismiss?

Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the violation of constitutional rights by a federal official is not actionable. It states in part: «any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer's judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable.»

Although the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized implied claims against federal officers in some contexts (e.g., Fourth and Fifth Amendments), it has not extended this implied right to Second Amendment claims.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 12(b)(6) allows a party to assert the defense of failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

The power to adjudicate a certain kind of controversy is known as subject-matter jurisdiction. In the federal courts, there are two basic kinds of subject-matter jurisdiction: suits between citizens of different states (diversity), and suits involving a federal question. 28 U.S.C. § 1331.

In federal cases, venue is controlled by 28 U.S.C. § 1391. It allows for proper venue based on the defendant's residence, the place where a substantial part of the relevant events occurred, or the place where the defendant can be made subject to personal jurisdiction.

Personal jurisdiction refers to the ability of a court to exercise power over a particular defendant or item of property. In personam jurisdiction exists when the forum has power over the person of a particular defendant. Jurisdiction over a plaintiff is generally not an issue because the plaintiff accedes to the court's jurisdiction by bringing suit in that court.

D is correct. The President's best argument in support of his motion to dismiss is that the citizen has failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Because there is no private right of action when a person alleges a violation of his Second Amendment rights by a federal official, and the citizen is making such a claim under this statute, the President is likely to succeed in a motion to dismiss.

A is incorrect. This argument would not succeed as a basis for dismissal of the case because the citizen is claiming a violation of his federal constitutional rights, which arises under federal law and thus satisfies federal question jurisdiction. When a plaintiff sues under federal law, the federal courts have jurisdiction unless the claim is frivolous; there is no reason presented why this would be frivolous.

B is incorrect. An improper venue claim would not be the most effective basis for dismissal because there are no facts provided that indicate the venue was improper. The citizen was charged under a federal law and sued in federal court based on a violation of his federal constitutional rights. No other facts suggest that venue is improper.

C is incorrect. Similar to an improper venue claim, a claim of lack of personal jurisdiction would be an ineffective basis for dismissal because there are no facts to support that the court lacks personal jurisdiction over the parties.