TALLAHASSEE, FLA—In the latest salvo in the war between anti-porn crusader Jack Thompson [pictured] and the Florida Supreme Court, the court has sanctioned the attorney and ruled that if he wishes to file any documents with the Florida Court, he will have to hire an attorney to do so on his behalf.

The Court had issued a show cause order last month demanding that Thompson provide an acceptable explanation why the court shouldn’t reject all future court filings from him unless they are signed by another member of The Florida Bar.

The Florida Supreme Court says that Thompson has abused the court process with “constant abusive” and “numerous meritless filings”. Thompson was warned about his filings last April after he submitted what the court deemed to be “pornographic materials” to the court.

Thompson is known nationally for his crusades against pornography and violence in the entertainment industry, taking on Howard Stern’s radio show and video game manufacturers. Those opponents in turn have filed complaints against Thompson with the Bar.

Thompson is facing misconduct charges in disciplinary proceedings filed against him by The Florida Bar which could result in his disbarment. Thompson is seeking $1 million from the Bar for damages he says have resulted from the Bar harassing him by investigating what he says are baseless complaints filed against him by disgruntled adversaries.

On receipt of the show cause order, Thompson had said it was ”the single greatest gift any court has ever given (him)” and claimed he would “deconstruct” the Florida Bar by way of a federal lawsuit.

On March 4, the day before his answer to the show cause order was due, Thompson filed a federal suit against the Florida Bar, accusing it of illegally promoting a political agenda favoring gay rights and the distribution of obscene and sexually explicit materials.

In issuing its decision, the court warned Thompson that if he disobeyed their order, he could face contempt of court proceedings or other sanctions. www.floridasupremecourt.org/decisions/2008/sc07-80.pdf

He has filed a motion seeking oral arguments on the order.

The court said Thompson has submitted 50 filings directly with them, all of which have either been forwarded to the referee, dismissed, or denied. “Additionally, Thompson’s most recent filings are repetitive, frivolous, and, like his earlier ones, insulting to the Court”, the unanimous decision said. “One of Thompson’s recent filings contains what Thompson refers to as a “children’s picture book for adults” that rehashes his previous arguments in illustrated form which he states was necessary due to “the Court’s inability to comprehend” his arguments.

Between the text of the motion, Thompson pasted images depicting swastikas, kangaroos in court, a reproduced dollar bill, cartoon squirrels, Paul Simon, Paul Newman, Ray Charles, a handprint with the word “SLAP!” written under it, Bar Governor Benedict P. Kuehne, a baby, Ed Bradley, Jack Nicholson, Justice Clarence Thomas, Julius Caesar, monkeys, and a house of cards, and the motion concludes with a photograph of the cover of Thompson’s book, “Out of Harm’s Way”.

“During the Bar’s investigatory process, Thompson filed a petition for writ of mandamus, one motion, 13 notices of filing, six supplements to the petition (two of which were filed after the Court’s disposition order), and a “response” to the Court’s disposition order. Further, Thompson engaged, to the point of abuse, as he has done in the instant proceedings, in a relentless and frivolous pursuit for vindication of his claim that he is being victimized by The Florida Bar. Case No. SC06-1113 was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction in part and denied in part”, the court wrote.

“Rather than filing a single response to this Court’s show cause order or seeking leave to file supplemental responses, Thompson has filed, almost daily, multiple responses, petitions, and motions. In one of these filings, he references the “children’s picture book for adults” and reiterates that he “sent a pleading chocked full of pictures to illustrate his verbal points, since the Court seemed unable to grasp the words.”

Thompson argues that no rule of procedure prohibits visual depictions in pleadings. Indeed, in this string of responses, he includes a visual depiction of John Hancock ‘who is reputed to have signed his name on the [Declaration of Independence] so that King George could read it without his spectacles’.

“Thompson misses the point. In addition to insulting the Court’s dignity, the picture-laden motion was admittedly repetitive of claims that had previously been raised, and Thompson had already been advised that he should wait to raise these claims on review of the referee’s report.

“Thompson’s multiple responses are rambling, argumentative, and contemptuous. He states that he “deeply appreciates” the show cause order and then argues that the Court is retaliating against him for embarrassing it and “pointing out some inconvenient truths” regarding itself and The Florida Bar. Further, he contends that the Bar will likely investigate any lawyer Thompson selects to represent him. Also, Thompson argues that he has only been trying to get the disciplinary proceedings “back on track” and the Court is attempting to “yank” his license before the referee’s report is filed.

Thompson asserts that he has rightfully sought relief by way of petitions for writs of mandamus and prohibition and questions whether the Court even knows that these writs exist.

In another “response, Thompson attached a letter he sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee requesting it to scrutinize the Court’s budget for allegedly failing to oversee the Bar. Thompson additionally claims, without elaboration, that he “is not frivolous and this [C]ourt knows it,” the Court is ignoring him, and no court can deny a citizen access to courts. In the conclusion to his latest response, Thompson states, “This Court has been foolish indeed. It’s [sic] bizarre, idiotic show cause order”

“Taken cumulatively, Thompson’s filings fail to show good cause why sanctions should not be imposed”, the court wrote. “Indeed, as noted above, he challenges the Court to impose sanctions. While Thompson generally complains that the Court is retaliating against him for uncovering certain alleged truths regarding itself and the Bar, we have not turned a blind eye to his claims. We have simply attempted to follow well-settled procedures designed to allow a fair and orderly determination of the proceedings. In his pleadings, Thompson makes vague assertions based on questionable facts and authority; often, this Court is an inappropriate forum to raise such claims in the first instance.

“Under the sanction herein imposed, Thompson is not being denied access to the courts; that access is simply being limited due to his abusiveness. Thompson may petition the Court, but may do so only through the assistance of counsel, whenever such counsel determines that the filing has merit and can be filed in good faith”.