M-EDIF, Members of EDIF; W. MJ Boyd, Founder also known as Wanda Boyd v. Donald...

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA M-EDIF, Members of EDIF; W. MJ Boyd, Case No. 2:26-1468-RMG Founder also known as Wanda Boyd, Plaintiff, v. ORDER AND OPINION Donald J. Trump, President, et al., Defendants.

This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of the Magistrate Judge (Dkt. No. 11) recommending that this action be dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. For the reasons stated below, the Court adopts the R&R as the order of the Court and dismisses this action without prejudice and without issuance and service of process.

I. Background Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis. Plaintiff attempts to bring this action in a representative capacity but cannot as a pro se litigant. (Dkt. No. 11 at 2). Thus, the Court construes Plaintiff’s complaint only as to herself, not “M-EDIF.”

Plaintiff sues various political figures and government officials. (Id.). Plaintiff alleges jurisdiction under Title VI but alleges that there are no injuries. (Id.). (noting, for example, that Plaintiff alleges “Gaetz commits human trafficking and Greene stalks Plaintiff”).

On April 10, 2026, the Magistrate Judge filed an R&R recommending dismissal of this action without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. (Id.) (concluding Plaintiff’s allegations are frivolous).

Plaintiff did not file objections to the R&R. II. Legal Standards A. Magistrate’s Report and Recommendation The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this Court. The recommendation has no presumptive weight, and the responsibility for making a final determination remains with this Court. Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). The Court is charged with making a de novo determination only of those portions of the Report to which specific objections are made, and the Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, or recommit the matter to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

B. Pro Se Pleadings This Court liberally construes complaints filed by pro se litigants to allow the development of a potentially meritorious case. See Cruz v. Beto, 405 U.S. 319 (1972); Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972). The requirement of liberal construction does not mean that the Court can ignore a clear failure in the pleadings to allege facts which set forth a viable federal claim, nor can the Court assume the existence of a genuine issue of material fact where none exists. See Weller v. Dep't of Social Services, 901 F.2d 387 (4th Cir. 1990).

III. Discussion Though Plaintiff did not file objections to the R&R, the Court has conducted a de novo review of the record and finds that the Magistrate Judge ably summarized the factual and legal issues in this matter and correctly concluded that this action should be dismissed without prejudice and without service of process. (Dkt. No. 11 at 1-3).

Conclusion For the reasons set forth above, the Court ADOPTS the R&R (Dkt. No. 11) as the order of the Court and DISMISSES this action without prejudice and without issuance and service of process.

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Richard Mark Gergel Richard Mark Gergel United States District Judge May 6, 2026 Charleston, South Carolina