Rossides
Rossides v. Gonzales
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Michael T. Rossides appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action seeking a declaratory judgment that his proposed operation of a for-profit online “press” for enabling bets on matters of alleged public interest is protected by the First Amendment and accordingly not subject to prosecution under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1084 , 1952, and 1953. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . After de novo review, LSO, Ltd. v. Strok, 205 F.3d 1146 , 1152 (9th Cir.2000), we affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Rossides’ action for lack of standing because Rossides did not demonstrate that he faces “ ‘a realistic danger of sustaining a direct injury as a result of the statute[s’] operation or enforcement.’ ” Thomas v. Anchorage Equal Rights Comm’n, 220 F.3d 1134 , 1139 (9th Cir.2000) (en banc) (quoting Babbitt v. United Farm Workers Nat'l Union, 442 U.S. 289, 298 , 99 S.Ct. 2301 , 60 L.Ed.2d 895 (1979)). No prosecuting authorities have ever communicated a specific threat or warning to initiate proceedings against Rossides. See id. at 1140. In addition, Rossides has not identified any relevant history of enforcement under either section 1952 or 1953,…