Whether California's Vexatious Litigant Laws violate the 1st, 8th and 14th Amendments

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1. Whether California’s Vexatious Litigant Laws , (CCP § 391(b)) violate the 1st, 8th and 14th Amendments of the US Constitution, particularly when a government agency is the movant, resulting in the court ordering a homeless plaintiff in forma pauperis to deposit a bond he could not afford, , dismissing the case. 2. Whether homeless petitioners’ homelessness (economic condition) are protected by antidiscriminatory provisions of California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act and 42 USC § 1983 particularly when invoking the US Constitution’s 14th Amendment equal protection clause. 3. Whether Pro Se petitioners have the right to seek ; class action status. 4. Whether the US District court erred when it remanded the case back to state court when one of the defendants is New York State domiciled Rolex Watch USA, Inc., in violation of 28 USC § 1332 . which provides the court diversity jurisdiction. 2 3 5. Whether the US District court erred when it ; remanded the case back to state court when PETITIONER competently alleged that defendants acted as “State Actors” in the meaning of 42 USC § 1983, providing the district court original jurisdiction. PARTIES INVOLVED The parties involved in this petition are: PETITIONERS Dale E. Phillips Robert Lacambra RESPONDENTS South Coast Plaza Rolex Watch USA, Inc. , County of Orange California Superior Court California Appellate Court , 3