Whether the Sixth Circuit's decision conflicts with its own recent declaration that the petitioner is 'duly qualified' to practice law, and whether the district court impermissibly assessed the petitioner's First Amendment activities in denying his bar admission application

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Within a four month span, Petitioner filed applications for admission to the bars of eight federal courts, including the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. All of those applications were granted, with the exception of the one submitted to the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan. 1. Notwithstanding the Sixth Circuit’s use of the “abuse of discretion” standard to review the District Court’s adverse admission decision, does the decision of the Court of Appeals impermissibly conflict with its own, recent declaration that Petitioner is “duly qualified” to practice law in its own Court? Should Certiorari be granted in order to secure and maintain uniformity of admission decisions? 2. Did the District Court use its unbridled discretion to impermissibly assess First Amendment activities of Petitioner, in particular, his criticism of public officials? Should Certiorari be granted in order to declare that constitutionally protected, expressive activities cannot be used as a basis to deny an application for admission to practice law? 1