Plaintiffs File Response

	The Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the federal case on Alabama's child support guidelines on 23 June 2004. Defendants are claiming, in their classic shotgun pleading, that all defendants are immune from suit. The Defendants, represented by the Alabama Attorney General's Office, believe they are above the law. Among the immunities requested include: Lack of Jurisdiction Eleventh Amendment Immunity Sovereign Immunity Legislative Immunity - Judges and lawyers believe they are legislators Qualified Immunity Plaintiffs lack standing to sue Don't be alarmed. This is the usual approach criminals take to justify their illegal actions. The Plaintiffs file their Response to the Defendants Motion to Dismiss on 10 July 2004. Plaintiffs rebut all the Defendants' immunities. Defendants cannot deny the existence of two (2) Settlement Agreements wherein the State of Alabama and all defendants agreed to operate the Child Support Committee according to law and insure the public has a part in the child support review process. Defendants cannot deny the existence of a federal court order that incorporated the Settlement Agreements into the Order. Violations of Settlement Agreements and federal court orders are serious matters. (In a recent Alabama case, Chief Justice Roy Moore was removed from office because he refused to obey a federal court order.) All files are in Adobe PDF format and may require extensive time to load. Please be patient.
	Back