Whether the lower court erred in dismissing petitioner's claims for violation of their constitutional rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments

No question identified. : . 1 : L FEDERAL QUESTION ‘ _ Where a Title IV-D foreign municipal tribunal and foreign agents oe operating under the Executive-Branch of government; pursuant to the i . Uniform Interstate Family Act; where the state municipal tribunal has wo failed to afford Due Process safeguards, as required by state and federal , 7 regulations. — Oo So Where commenced actions by the state violate the rule announced in — od Penneoyer V. Neff, 95 U.S.714 (1877); pursuant to Due Process and ; 4 ' Equal Protection of the Law pursuant to state and county administrativei . Non Judice. ; _ ‘Where a man or woman whom has previously invoked his or her 4 and 14TH Amendment United States co -. Constitutional protection, pursuant to state municipal tribunals dealing in Ss commerce, administrative actions, commence without notifying the U.S. S : _ Department of State Pursuant to.22 CFR 93.1-93.2; 28 USC 1330; acts uo are in violations of the Civil Rights Act: Section 1983: 18 USC 241; a Conspiracy Against Rights; 18 USC 242; Deprivation of Rights; Under the Color of Law, and 5.1.B. 1. Due Process Claims and Section 1983; Gk Pursuant to what circumstances does a man or woman being compelled to associate with the corporate " fictitious entity" " initiate or cease further" communication-with the state foreign municipal corporate entity and hereby purge the taint from Penneoyer.