Sloan v. Truong

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• rejecting mandamus claim because plaintiff “sued only the United States itself rather than any federal officer or agency”
• “[T]he Communications Decency Act ... is a criminal statute that prohibits the making of obscene or harassing telecommunications, but creates no private right of action.”
• there is no express or implied provision for a private remedy under 47 U.S.C. § 223
• “[Dliversity jurisdiction does not exist for [plaintiff] has failed to allege, much less prove, complete diversity.”
• “[T]he authority to enforce the CDA lies with government authorities not with private citizens.”
• “[T]he district court lacks jurisdiction when the requirements for mandamus are not met.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).