Jump To

Top Caption Trial Court Document

Support FLP

CourtListener is a project of Free
Law Project, a federally-recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit. Members help support our work and get special access to features.

Please become a member today.

Join Free.law Now

March 6, 2026 Get Citation Alerts Download PDF Add Note

Jeremy A. Morin, also known as Kelsea Morgan v. Maura T. Healey, Governor, and Kimberly Driscoll, Lt. Governor

District Court, D. Massachusetts

• Citations: None known
• Docket Number: 1:25-cv-12078

• Precedential Status: Unknown Status

• Opinion

• Authorities (4)

• Cited By (0)

• Summaries (0)

• Similar Cases (0)

• PDF

Trial Court Document

UDNIISTTERDI CSTT AOTFE MS DASISSTARCIHCUT SCEOTUTRS T

        CIVIL ACTION NO. 25-12078-RGS                            

              JEREMY A. MORIN,                                   
           also known as Kelsea Morgan                           

                      v.                                         

MAURA T. HEALEY, Governor, and KIMBERLY DRISCOLL, Lt. Governor

                    ORDER                                        

                 March 6, 2026                                   

STEARNS, D.J.

Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, initiated this action by filing a Complaint
against Governor Healey and Lieutenant Governor Driscoll alleging, among

other things, that they each failed to respond to Morin’s self-prepared
petition seeking a pardon. Doc. No. 1.

On November 12, 2025, the court entered a Memorandum and Order

that allowed Morin’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, assessed
the filing fee pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (b)(2), and directed the filing of an
Amended Complaint. Doc. No. 4. Morin was advised, among other things,

that the Complaint failed to allege a plausible claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Title II of the ADA. Id. The Order explained that parole decisions are
discretionary and if otherwise constitutionally exercised, the judiciary may
not interfere. Id. Now before the court is Morin’s Amended Complaint. Doc. No. 8.

However, the Amended Complaint fails to remedy the pleading deficiencies

in the original Complaint. Morin references Garcia-Gasualdo v. Honeywell
Aerospace of P.R., Inc., 135 F.4th 10 (1st Cir. 2025) and Rivera-Diaz v.

Humana Insurance of P.R., Inc., 748 F.3d 387 (1st Cir. 2014) because they
“have some similiar (sic) issues as this action involves and why this action
that the Plaintiff is filing.” Id. at 5 – 6. Morin’s reliance on these cases is
misplaced because Garcia-Gasualdo concerns receipt of the notice of the

right to sue under the ADA and Title VII and Rivera-Diaz v concerns the fact
that filing a charge with the EEOC does not toll the statute of limitations
under Title VII or the ADEA. The Amended Complaint fails to remedy the

pleading deficiencies in the original Complaint. It thus does not "plausibly
narrate a claim for relief." Schatz v. Republican State Leadership Comm., 669 F.3d 50, 55 (1st Cir. 2012).

Plaintiff is reminded that to the extent she seeks release from

confinement, a challenge to the fact or duration of confinement may only be
pursued through a petition for writ of habeas corpus. See Preiser v.
Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 484 (1973). If plaintiff wishes to challenge in federal
court the validity of her confinement, she may do so, with the attendant

procedural and exhaustion requirements, by bringing a petition for a writ of
habeas corpus.

For the foregoing reasons, this action is DISMISSED for failure to state
a claim upon which relief may be granted. The clerk shall enter a separate
order of dismissal.

                     SO ORDERED.                                 

                      /s/ Richard G. Stearns                     
                     UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE