James C. Strader v. City Confidential, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Kansas orders pro se prisoner James C. Strader to show cause why his § 1983 action should not be dismissed. The court concludes that the complaint does not plausibly allege that any defendant acted under color of state law or violated a federal constitutional right, and that the asserted defamation claims do not support federal jurisdiction. Plaintiff is given until March 6, 2026, to respond.

Holdings

1. The complaint failed to state a plausible § 1983 claim because it did not allege facts showing that any defendant acted under color of state law.
2. The complaint failed to state a plausible § 1983 claim because it did not identify a federal constitutional or statutory right allegedly violated by a named defendant.
3. Plaintiff's defamation claims were state-law claims and could not support federal-question jurisdiction; because the complaint stated no claim within the court's original jurisdiction, the court could not exercise supplemental jurisdiction over them.
4. Plaintiff failed to state a plausible Bivens claim because he named no federal agents and did not plead facts showing a violation of the Bill of Rights.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the complaint plausibly alleged that any defendant acted under color of state law for purposes of 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
2. Whether the complaint identified a federal constitutional or statutory right allegedly violated by a named defendant.
3. Whether plaintiff's defamation claims provided a basis for federal-question or supplemental jurisdiction.
4. Whether plaintiff stated a plausible claim under Bivens.
5. Whether plaintiff's references to 28 U.S.C. §§ 42 and 43 supplied a federal jurisdictional or substantive basis for his claims.

Disposition

other