Whether the Electoral College clause (1787) has violated the Comity clause (1787) and three subsequent amendments, the First (1789), the Fifth (1789) and foremostly the Fourteenth (1868), all of which shall prevail and supersede

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Petitioner, a citizen of the United States and a resident in the State of New York, on December 14, 2016 filed a civil lawsuit against Congress on the ground that Petitioner’s equal voting right has been demeaned and ; diluted by the Electoral College while Congress ; collectively has failed to uphold the Constitution which guarantees equal voting right for every American. Without addressing the facts and evidence presented by Petitioner, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York granted the motion by the ' Defendants’ attorney to dismiss the case citing lack of standing. Adopting the same rationale, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the district ; court's dismissal. The questions presented are as follows: 1. Whether Petitioner has the standing to “invoke a right to constitutional protection when he or she is harmed... even if the legislature refuses to act” (Obergefell v. Hodges 2015). 2. Whether the Electoral College clause (1787) has violated the Comity clause (1787) and three : subsequent amendments, the First (1789), the Fifth (1789) and foremostly the Fourteenth (1868), all of which shall prevail and supersede. 3. Whether, based on #1 & #2, the Court has the ; duty and authority to review and declare the Electoral College clause no longer constitutional. 4. Whether, based on #3, Congress has the duty and authority to pass new law to rectify the violation of equal voting right guaranteed by the Constitution for every American. ; ii