Affidavit and Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion to Proceed Without Payment of Fees

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

[District of New Jersey]

Naomi Johnson,

Plaintiff,

v.

Defendants:

• State of New Jersey (Fictitious Entity)

• Glen Ridge Township (Fictitious Entity)

• E.C.R.B. Towing (Fictitious Entity)

• Joe Strollo (Private and Professional)

• Sergeant Anthony Mazza (Private and Professional)

• The Honorable Judge Mark Clemente (Private and Professional)

• Elizabeth Brewster, Esq. (Private and Professional)

• Denise C. Iandolo, Administrator, Violations Clerk (Private and Professional)

• Detective Sergeant Daniel Manley (Private and Professional)

• Lt. Timothy Faranda (Private and Professional)

• Chief of Police Sean P. Quinn (Private and Professional)

• Glen Ridge Borough Administrator Michael Rohal (Private and Professional)

Civil Action No.: ________

Support of Waiver of Court Fees

Affidavit and Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion to Proceed Without Payment of Fees

I, Naomi Johnson, being duly sworn, state as follows:

1. I am a medically disabled woman on a fixed income. My sole source of support is disability benefits, which barely cover basic necessities of food, shelter, and medical care. I have no discretionary income to pay the extraordinary filing fees required by this Court. To require such payment would effectively bar me from pursuing justice.

2. The right of access to the courts is fundamental. As one of We the People—the source of all governmental authority under the United States Constitution—it is contrary to the principles of liberty and justice to deny court access based solely on poverty.

Legal Authorities

• Magna Carta (1215), Clause 40: “To no one will we sell, to no one deny or delay, right or justice.” This ancient guarantee—recognized as a foundation of Anglo-American law—establishes that justice may not be conditioned upon payment.

• United States Constitution:

◦ Preamble: The People established the government and courts to “establish Justice.” Justice cannot be denied to the very People who created government.

◦ First Amendment: guarantees the right to petition the government for redress of grievances, which necessarily includes access to courts.

◦ Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments: Due Process and Equal Protection require meaningful access to justice without discrimination based on wealth.

• Case Law:

◦ Boddie v. Connecticut, 401 U.S. 371 (1971): The Supreme Court held that states cannot deny indigent persons access to courts in matters of fundamental rights, recognizing that court access is a due process right.

◦ Griffin v. Illinois, 351 U.S. 12 (1956): The Court held that “there can be no equal justice where the kind of trial a man gets depends on the amount of money he has.”

◦ M.L.B. v. S.L.J., 519 U.S. 102 (1996): The Court struck down financial barriers to appeals in parental rights cases, reaffirming that access to justice cannot depend solely on ability to pay.

• Human Rights Law:

◦ Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Art. 8: “Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating fundamental rights.”

◦ International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), Art. 14: guarantees equal access to courts. The U.S. has ratified the ICCPR, making it binding under the Supremacy Clause (U.S. Const. art. VI).

• Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England: Justice must be “free, full, and speedy.” Blackstone emphasized that the denial of justice based on wealth is contrary to natural law.

• American Jurisprudence (Am. Jur. 2d, Constitutional Law § 326): Access to courts is an essential element of due process, and unreasonable financial barriers are unconstitutional.

Conclusion

For these reasons, I respectfully request this Honorable Court grant my motion to proceed in forma pauperis. To deny this request would be to deny me meaningful access to justice, contrary to the Constitution, Magna Carta, Supreme Court precedent, and binding principles of human rights and due process.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Dated: ___________

Signature: ____________________