Whether the Texas district court violated the Petitioner's Federal Civil Rights

QUESTIONS PRESENTED . ; : 1. Whether the Texas district court violated the Petitioner’s Federal Civil Rights ; ; under Section 1983 by discriminating against the Petitioner’s Religious Freedom and violating the Petitioner’s Constitutional Religious Freedoms. Did the court violate the First Amendment, the Texas Constitution and equal protection clause under the . . Fourteenth Amendment regarding Civil Right since they terminated the Petitioners : Parental Rights due to her religion. Does the state have a right to terminate parental : rights for one reason, the parents dre Christians? Does this violate the Federal Constitutionally protected rights of freedom of religion to raise children in the religion © of Christianity without the fear of government interference? Did the government ~ overstep its boundaries when it terminated parental rights due to religious beliefs? 2. Whether the Texas district court violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. : , : The State of Texas violated the Petitioner’s rights by prohibiting her free exercise of ; religion. This court must review this case to restore the compelling interest test as set’ . forth in Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963) and Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972) and to guarantee its application in all cases where free exercise of religion is substantially burdened; and (2) to provide a claim or defense to persons whose . religious exercise is substantially burdened by government. This is an ongoing debate ; now as there is a current case now at the Supreme Court level trying to overturn the RFRA in the United States Supreme Court in October of 2019. ; 3. Did the state violate the petitioner’s due process rights by committing fraud on the ; os court by suppressing evidence to the district court and appeals court so her children ; ; would not be returned to Oklahoma? . 4. Whether the Texas district court erred in terminating the parental rights of Oklahoma residents, without the permission of the state of Oklahoma. In violation of : the UCCIEA law, violating Federal Jurisdictional issues where two separate states : Oklahoma and Texas have argued over jurisdiction. Whether the district court erred . by violating the Petitioner’s Constitutional Fourteenth Due Process Right, a Federal right, by denying her the right to have her case heard in Oklahoma where the judge : was going to return custody of her children to her. ; : , ii 5. Whether the Texas district court violated the Federal law in regard to ICWA, (Indian ; ; Child Welfare Act) by refusing to contact the Native American Nation. Is the new order denying the Cherokee tribe’s motion to dismiss overturning ICWA and effects this case at par. . : 6. Whether the Texas district court violated the Petitioner’s due process rights according : to the Fourteenth Amendment terminating the parents’ rights due to homeschooling. ; Did the court violate the parents’ first amendment religious freedom by terminating parental rights due to homeschooling for religious reasons, in conflict with the United States case Yoder vs. Wisconsin 406 U.S. 205. Did the court violate the Texas law that made it illegal on May 7, 2019 to terminate parental rights due to homeschooling? 7. Did the state violate the Due Process Clause by denying court-appointed counsel to : an indigent pro-se parent facing termination of her parental rights without applying the due process analysis mandated by the Court in Lassiter v. Department of Social ‘ Services, then denying the indigent person aright to appellate review of the legal . , sufficiency of the evidence supporting termination because the court suppressed evidence intentionally so the case would not be returned to Oklahoma. Did the state _ violate the law by fraudulently withholding evidence from the appeals court, and when : : the abatement hearing was ordered by the appeals court they argued she was denied . ; appellate review of the issues because she was an indigent person who did not know how