On January 20, 2024, Judge Nathanael M. Cousins granted the defendants' motion to dismiss and denied the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment. The court ruled that "no 28th Amendment appears in the Constitution" and that the plaintiff "cannot state a claim for relief under a constitutional amendment that does not exist."See, Vikram Valame vs. Joseph Robinette Biden, et al, Complaint, In the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Case No. 5:23-cv-03018, document number 61, filed January 20, 2024 Valame filed a notice of appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on the same day as the district court's ruling.See, Vikram Valame vs. Joseph Robinette Biden, et al, Complaint, In the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Case No. 5:23-cv-03018, document number 63, filed January 20, 2024 As of early 2024, the case was pending before the Ninth Circuit.
On January 20 2024 Judge Nathanael M Cousins granted the defendants' motion to dismiss and denied the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment The court ruled that "no 28th Amendment appears in the Constitution" and that the plaintiff "cannot state a claim for relief under a constitutional amendment that does not exist"See Vikram Valame vs Joseph Robinette Biden et al Complaint In the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Case No 523-cv-03018 document number 61 filed January 20 2024 Valame filed a notice of appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on the same day as the district court's rulingSee Vikram Valame vs Joseph Robinette Biden et al Complaint In the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Case No 523-cv-03018 document number 63 filed January 20 2024 As of early 2024 the case was pending before the Ninth Circuit