AMBER'S DUMBEST LEGAL ARGUMENT?? "You can't sue me, I'm homeless!" - Attorney analysis

Amber Heard has definitely tried to contort the law to her benefit on many occasions, but this argument that the U.S. District Court (where she's being sued by one of her insurance companies) lacks diversity jurisdiction because she's "stateless" is a long reach even by her standards. We look at what diversity jurisdiction is, the difference between a residence and a domicile, and why trying to claim homelessness abroad isn't going to create a jurisdictional problem.

00:00 Intro
00:37 The current status of the insurance lawsuits
01:23 Amber claims she's not a US resident, therefore no diversity jurisdiction
02:07 Federal courts have limited jurisdiction compared to state courts
02:57 Looking at the diversity jurisdiction statute
03:52 Factually, Amber seems to confuse vacation with residency
04:50 As usual, she relies on law that doesn't apply to her situation
05:45 In the case she cites, the party was a permanent resident of a foreign country
08:06 Amber would have to live in New York to destroy diversity
11:10 You don't escape your domicile (and its taxes!) by just deciding you're homeless
12:15 Residency vs. domicile
14:33 The insurance companies aren't super impressed either
15:51 Bottom line: It's trash