May 5, 2025
CASE AGAINST AMP DISMISSED:
All Claims Against AMP in Federal Court Lawsuit in Nevada Dismissed Today
Justice prevailed today!
In a case relying on allegations from multiple other lawsuits against AMP that remain unproven, a federal district court judge today ruled that AMP properly showed the claims made against it had no right to proceed any further.
The Judge recognized that the Nevada court has no jurisdiction over AMP – and a few social media posts, at best, won’t cut it.
The Judge dismissed all claims against AMP brought under the Anti-Terrorism Act, because the plaintiff failed to plead sufficient facts to support his claims—and can show no way that he suffered personally from an act of international terrorism, or that AMP provided any assistance to aid in any act of terrorism.
AMP’s social media and advocacy statements are protected free speech under the First Amendment and the claims against AMP fail to allege anything more, according to the Judge
The Judge ruled the plaintiff had not pled any extreme or outrageous conduct by AMP, or that he suffered any injury, based on his allegations about AMP’s advocacy and social media posts
AMP’s advocacy and public forum statements—which include on social media—are protected by the First Amendment, and the conclusory allegations of the plaintiff cannot negate that
AMP took its actions in good faith and spoke on issues of public concern, further supporting dismissal of the claims against it.
While the plaintiff has the right to replead on some (but not all) of these claims, the Judge chastised the plaintiff for previously including “51 pages of background material before getting to a five-page statement of facts,” and made clear that the Court did not approve of the plaintiff spending “pages describing a national organization’s response to a congressional subpoena, repetitive allegations about various terrorist organizations, and activities at campuses other than” where the plaintiff attends school. The Judge said it best: “None of that seems relevant to this case.”
Earlier in this case, the same Court struck down the plaintiff’s attempt to serve AMP’s founder and call that service on another defendant. We expect that ruling to stand as well, and seek all fees for plaintiff’s wrongful attempt to avoid the requirements.
We stand with AMP. And today, that means we stand on the side of victory.
Quote from Christina A. Jump, Civil Litigation Department Head and lead counsel for AMP:
“I welcome the thorough analysis by the Court—the reasoning and legal precedents here apply in many other courts across the country as well. AMP has every right to lawful advocacy protected by the First Amendment. As the Court recognized, the plaintiff may not like what AMP has to say, but that doesn’t violate any laws. Today is a win for free speech and a huge win for our clients, and we congratulate them on seeing this through.”
Quote from Samira Elhosary, Civil Litigation Staff Attorney and co-counsel for AMP:
“Our client AMP has long endured false allegations and claims about the work they do. This decision is evidence of the complete lack of facts behind the inflammatory rhetoric used against AMP in this lawsuit and others. We will continue our hard work for AMP fighting against these baseless claims—and we celebrate this key win!”
Quote from Osama Abuirshaid, Executive Director of AMP:
“I am relieved to see the judge apply the law and the system work the way it should. Today is an important victory and sends a clear message.”
