Q: why wld a fed. mag, judge diss. a 42 U.S.C. § 1985(2) claim for fail. to allege conspiracy based on race or class inv an

A: A magistrate judge in a federal district court might dismiss a 42 U.S.C. § 1985(2) claim for failing to allege conspiracy based upon race or class because, despite the broad language of the statute, the interpretation and application by courts have historically required that the conspiracy involve some form of discriminatory animus. This interpretation stems from the statute's origins and purpose, which was primarily aimed at addressing the conspiracies that deprived individuals of their civil rights, especially those rooted in racial discrimination. Over time, courts have extended this to include class-based discrimination, requiring plaintiffs to show that the alleged conspiracy was motivated by an invidious discriminatory intent against a protected class.

The text of 42 U.S.C. §§ 1985(2) and (3) might not explicitly mention race, class, or invidious animus, but judicial interpretations have infused these elements into the requirements for a valid claim. This interpretation aligns with the broader objectives of civil rights legislation, which seek to remedy and prevent discrimination. Courts often look beyond the literal text to the purpose and historical context of legislation, leading to an understanding that the statute targets not just any conspiracy, but those specifically intended to undermine the equal protection of the laws, particularly through discriminatory practices.

Thus, for a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1985(2) to proceed, it's generally necessary to allege and prove that the conspiracy was motivated by discriminatory intent against a protected class. This requirement ensures that the statute serves its role in protecting civil rights, focusing on preventing and remedying actions that have the specific intent to discriminate based on race or class. When drafting a complaint under this statute, including details that suggest a discriminatory motive behind the conspiracy can be crucial for the claim to withstand initial legal challenges.