Thistle

I. INTRODUCTION

18 Presently before the Court is the Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”) of 19 Plaintiff David John Thistle (“Plaintiff”). ECF No. 2 (“Mot.”). Plaintiff, proceeding pro 20 se, alleges that the Arkansas Secretary of State’s website contains unconstitutional 21 limitations on candidate eligibility to run for the United States House of Representatives. 22 See generally ECF No. 1 (“Compl.”). Having considered carefully Plaintiff’s Complaint, 23 IFP Motion, and the applicable law, the Court (1) DENIES Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed 24 IFP and (2) DISMISSES the Complaint without prejudice. 25 26 1 In reviewing the instant motion, the Court is mindful that “[a] document filed pro se is to be liberally construed … and a pro se [pleading], however inartfully pleaded, must be held to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers.” Erickson v. Pardus, 28 II. BACKGROUND Plaintiff alleges that “while researching The ARKANSAS Secretary of State’s 2 Official Website to become an ‘Official Ballot Candidate for the Office of U.S. 3 Representative,’” Plaintiff discovered that the website unconstitutionally…