Pro se litigation has become a significant portion of lawsuits filed. According to the Federal Judicial Center’s Integrated Database[1], for the period of 2000 to 2019, pro se plaintiffs made up 25.2% of all litigants. With Generative A.I. making the litigation process even more accessible for laypeople, this number is only going to continue to grow, and with it, the threat of voluminous, vexatious pleadings. 

Kris Jackson, pro se, brought a consumer fraud action in Johnson County, Kansas, in front of Judge Rhonda Mason. In response to Plaintiff’s voluminous filings in that case, the Court imposed a general filing restriction. In response, Jackson brought a § 1983 action in federal court against Judge Mason, her administrative assistant, and the Johnson County District Court alleging that filing restrictions constituted discrimination and violated her right to the courts.

The named defendants, represented by Fisher, Patterson, Sayler & Smith’s Charles Branson and Katherine Sittenauer, moved to dismiss, arguing Ms. Jackson failed to state a claim and the parties were immune under sovereign immunity. The Federal District Court agreed, dismissing the claims under the Eleventh Amendment. The District Court also found Judge Mason’s administrative assistant was entitled to quasi-judicial immunity. Jackson appealed.

On September 3, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued its opinion in Jackson v. Mason, et al., No. 24-3131. Jackson raised several arguments on appeal, all of which the Tenth Circuit rejected. In particular, Jackson alleged the Defendants were not immune because she alleged a clearly established right and an Ex Parte Young exception applied. However, clearly established rights have no bearing on sovereign immunity, and federal courts are generally not permitted to issue injunctions to state court judges or clerks. See Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson, 595 U.S. 30, 39 (2021). Jackson also argued subject matter jurisdiction was improperly considered, but such matters must be considered, even without challenge from any party. Accordingly, the Tenth Circuit affirmed.

Courts have wide latitude in controlling how cases are litigated. As pro se litigants begin utilizing generative A.I. to assist them in the drafting process, the threat of voluminous pleadings only grows. For now, filing restrictions and other judicial determinations can shield defending parties from would-be vexatious litigants, and those decisions will generally not be overturned.

You can read the full opinion at: https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/sites/ca10/files/opinions/010111294007.pdf

[1] United States Courts, Just the Facts: Trends in Pro Se Civil Litigation from 2000 to 2019, Fig. 3, https://www.uscourts.gov/data-news/judiciary-news/2021/02/11/just-facts-trends-pro-se-civil-litigation-2000-2019.