Vey v. Clinton

Background

Eileen Vey, representing herself, sought permission to file a petition in this Court without paying court fees. Her underlying claims accused many high-level officials and private persons of civil-rights and RICO violations. The Third Circuit dismissed her appeal as frivolous, and over several years she filed many petitions in this Court that were denied. Eight weeks earlier the Court had already told the Clerk not to accept certain extraordinary filings from her unless she paid fees.

Reasoning

The Court addressed whether Vey should be allowed to proceed without paying fees and whether the Court should accept future filings from her. Finding her claims patently frivolous and prior warnings ineffective, the Court denied her request to file without fees and instructed the Clerk to refuse any further noncriminal certiorari petitions from her unless she follows the Court’s rules and pays the required docketing fees. The opinion gives her until June 30, 1997, to pay the fees and submit a petition that complies with the rules. The Court relied on its earlier decision in Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals for the authority to bar future in forma pauperis filings.

Real world impact

Practically, the ruling stops this individual from sending noncriminal petitions to the Court unless she first pays fees and files correctly. The Clerk is ordered to refuse further noncompliant submissions from her. The decision is procedural, not a final ruling on the merits of her allegations, and applies to noncriminal matters only.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Stevens filed a brief dissent, citing his earlier disagreements in Martin and related cases and respectfully opposing the majority action.