Can a state or its agency violate Appellant's constitutional rights to enforce upon him an obligation that is contractual in nature?

Questions Presented 1. Can a state or its agency violates Appellant’s constitutional protected rights to enforce upon him an obligation that his contractual in nature? The Supreme court of Minnesota ruled in 1996 and affirmed in 1997 stating that title iv-d is unconstitutional in the fact that the lower tribunal (administrative agency) skipped over the district court’s original jurisdiction in having hearing officers practicing law on the bench. The original jurisdiction is found in article II, clause II of the United States Constitution that stated plainly that “if a state is party to an action, the supreme court shall have original jurisdiction’. 2. 42 U.S.C. § 1983 allows a person whose constitutional rights have been deprived to bring an action to redress the constitutional deprivation. This action was brought against Florida Department of Revenue’s Director Ann Coffin. A common law suit was brought against the other Defendant the Florida Department of Revenue for Deprivation of rights and common law tort. Can a natural fiction in the Florida Department of Revenue force a contractual obligation upon the Appellant without his free consent without duress, and intimidation? Can a natural flesh and blood woman i.e Ann Coffin force a contractual obligation upon Appellant without his free consent without threat, intimidation or any kinds of duress? The Appellee’s are forbidden under the laws of contract to enforce an obligation which is contractual by nature upon the Appellant. 3. Can Title IV-D of the Social Security Act that housed child support enforcement be forced upon anyone in the fact that title IV-D was never enacted into positive law, see 1 U.S.C. 204 -prima facie. According to this court’s opinion in Blessings vs. Freestone (1997), Tile iv-d of the social security act requires a contract to enforce obligation. According to Article 1 section 10 of the United States Constitution, “no state shall make any law impairing the obligation of contract. 4. Can anyone be forced to pay for state expenditures if they were never a party to the contract that generated the 2 42 U.S.C. 601(d), makes it clear that title iv-d was only to recoup state expenditure. See Oliphant vs. Bradley, Mason vs. Bradley. Title iv-d was never intended to benefit any individual, no one has any enforceable right under title iv-d. See also Blessings vs. Freestone. B.