Atheist group to sue House chaplain

[rug]

13. There are none.

You wrote a damned good summary. Under Bivens there must be a clear violation of a Constitutional right by a federal agent acting under color of law against an individual who has suffered actual damages.

The other problem with this lawsuit is that, as plead, it connot overcome the separation of powers doctrine. Article 1, Section 2, Clause 5 of the Constitution establishes complete autonomy in the House over its own officers. Many more well-crafted suits have foundered on these grounds.

At least his claim of standing is clear:

20. Barker retains his ordination and uses it to perform weddings, though he no longer preaches the tenets of his former religion.

21. Barker has deeply and sincerely held beliefs that are purely ethical or moral in
source and content but that impose upon him a duty of conscience parallel to his former religion.

He's one syllable shy of saying atheism is a religion.