Thyme v. The Republican Party et al
Judge Richard G. Stearns: ORDER entered. The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis 2 is GRANTED. The complaint is DISMISSED. The clerk shall issue a final order of dismissal. (PSSA, 3) Modified on 9/9/2021 (PSSA, 3).
Case 1:21-cv-11023-RGS Document 6 Filed 09/08/21 Page 1 of 4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
CIVIL ACTION NO. 21-11023-RGS
ARTHUR THYME, a/k/a Jessie F. Swartz, Jr. & Franklin H. Wright 1
THE REPUBLICAN PARTY & THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY
September 8, 2021
Pro se litigant Arthur Thyme brings this action in which he calls for a
restructuring of this country’s political system. For the reasons set forth
below, the court will dismiss this action.
Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis
Upon review of Thyme’s motion for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis, the court concludes that Thyme has adequately shown that he is
unable to prepay the filing fee. Accordingly, the motion is GRANTED.
Based on papers the plaintiff has filed in other lawsuits, e.g., Wright v.
Omega, C.A. No. 20-10970-RGS (D. Mass.); McInerney v. Swartz, C.A. No.
20-07370 (N.D. Ill.), it appears that his true name is Jesse F. Swartz, Jr.
and that he also uses the aliases Arthur Thyme and Franklin H. Wright.
Case 1:21-cv-11023-RGS Document 6 Filed 09/08/21 Page 2 of 4
Review of the Complaint
Because Thyme is proceeding in forma pauperis, his pleading is
subject to screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). This statute authorizes
federal courts to dismiss actions in which a plaintiff seeks to proceed
without prepayment of fees if the action is malicious, frivolous, fails to state
a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a
defendant who is immune from such relief. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). In
conducting this review, the court liberally construes the plaintiff’s pleadings
because he is proceeding pro se. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 52021 (1972).
Thyme characterizes his pleading as a “Petition to Comply Remedy.”
(Dkt #1). Thyme asserts therein that Republican and Democratic political
parties of the United States “operate as gangs” who “are not only in
violation of the RICO Act, they violate Constitutional premise and common
sense.” Id. at 2. According to Thyme, the present two-party system has
resulted in “[p]arty based control” instead of a “competency-based reward
system.” Id. at 4. Thyme alleges that party leadership is based on “loyalty,
secrecy and control, not upon an individual’s competency or common
sense.” Id. at 5.
Case 1:21-cv-11023-RGS Document 6 Filed 09/08/21 Page 3 of 4
Under the heading “Remedy,” Thyme asserts that “[a] new political
system would need to be created behind closed doors, that system based
upon objective skill development and proper assessment thereof.” Id. at 8.
Under this proposed system, the “foundational competencies” of all citizens
would be evaluated. Political affiliation would not be considered in this
Within the group of “highly scored individuals,” the “most
competent persons for selection and placement into the new government”
would be identified. Id. “The military would be informed and prepared for
the remove and replacement process to follow.” Id. “Current Republican
and Democratic leadership would [also] be informed of the problem and
why they were going to be removed.” Id. This “disclosure process” would
allow compromised persons “to step aside in favor of the newly trained
leaders to avoid casualties.” Id.
This complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be
granted. Thyme’s proposal runs contrary to the United States Constitution,
which provides that “the People” elect members of Congress. See U.S.
Const. art. I, § 2, cl. 2; U.S. Const. amend. XVII. Further, a political party’s
constitutional right to freedom of association allows it to determine its own
structure, identity, and process for electing its leaders. See Eu v. San
Francisco Cnty. Democratic Cent. Comm., 489 U.S. 214, 228 (1989).
Case 1:21-cv-11023-RGS Document 6 Filed 09/08/21 Page 4 of 4
In accordance with the foregoing, the complaint is DISMISSED. The
clerk shall issue a final order of dismissal.
/s/ Richard G. Stearns
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?