Should senior legal officers be allowed to deny further appellate review when there is constitutional ground to grant it?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Should senior legal officers of the state court of last resort, such as the Justices of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, be allowed . ; to deny Petitioner Further Appellate Review when there is constitutional ground to grant it and to contradict its opinion in a . precedent, Christo v. Boyle Insurance Agency, Inc., 402 Mass. 815 . (1988), displaying circumstances from which legal principles equivalent . to the case at bar may be drawn, in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and its federal equivalent, the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment? 2. Would senior legal officers of the state court of last resort, such as the justices of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, be consenting to race-gender discrimination in contravention of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. §2000d et seg.) and Title IX of the ‘Education Amendments Act of 1972 (20 U.S.C. §§1681-1688), as denying Petitioner Further Appellate Review simultaneously denies her a Superior Court judicial review of her race-gender discrimination complaint against the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Urban Studies and Planning (“MIT DUSP”)?