Whether employees of Florida government may conspire with more government employees, including judges, to avoid compensating their victims

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1, Whether employees of Florida government, who have callously disregarded and failed to exercise the standard of care requested by law and expected from professionals in the USA and State of Florida pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 316.0745 and the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD)” may conspire with more government employees, including judges, to avoid compensating their victims. Truly, when a van hit me in 2013, the State of Florida had had -and still hasa duty at least since 2003 . to place a warning "TWO-WAY BIKE ROUTE" traffic sign (WTBRS) under the warning “ONE WAY” traffic lanes sign, because the drivers will not expect contraflow bicycles if they do not see a WIBRS. Also, U.S. Const. Amend. IX protects rights not enumerated in the Constitution, including my right to benefit from the best and newest practices in traffic regulation in the USA and the world. 2. Whether Fla. Stat. 68.093(2)(d) has been illegal, as it has conflicted with U.S. Const. Amend. XIV, sec. | (right to due process in all state courts), U.S. Const. Amend. V (right to due process in all courts) and with U.S. Const. Amend. VIII (no cruelty is allowed; it prohibits cruelty against criminals so it even more prohibits cruelty against those who have not violated the laws) by having limited discriminatingly to five the number of actions by a pro-se plaintiff in each Circuit Court of the State of Florida. Indeed, if 6 different members of one or more organized crime (OrC) groups have injured me in 6 different incidents, and have “convinced” all available attorneys not to assist me on contingency, Fla. Stat. § 68.093(2)(d) does not allow me to sue as pro-se more than five criminals, which is absurd, cruel, illegal, and even proof that OrC is behind Fla. Stat. § 68.093(2)(d) and all such abusive laws. Certainly, the legislators in Florida who voted Fla. Stat. § 68.093(2)(d) had interests to vote it -please ask the FBI, NSA, etc. to investigate them-. Please ask the current legislators in Florida to respect the Constitution of the USA and to eliminate Fla. Stat. § 68.093(2)(d). Moreover, VALENTIN SPATARU vs FL DOT .. SCOTUS 02/03/20, page ii “Lex iniusta non est lex” and judges have the authority and the obligation to refuse to enforce unjust laws, therefore, certainly, by having enforced the unjust law, the judges of State of Florida have proved their interests against certain actions -please ask the FBI, NSA, etc. to investigate them-; the judges of State of Florida have proved common interests with the Respondents -or their managers if Respondents are organizations-, such as common investments -please investigate whether the funds for "TWO-WAY BIKE ROUTE" warning signs have been embezzled and who “profited”-. Indeed, all Judges should have refused to enforce Fla. Stat. § 68.093(2)(d), thus the below Judges should not have dismissed any case, including my case, based on Fla. Stat. § 68.093(2)(d) or such abusive laws. Judges cannot invoke judicial immunity for acts that violate litigants civil rights. Truly, judges and legislators have been liable for criminal acts committed under “color of law”, pursuant to 18 U.S. C. § 242, and for conspiracy against rights, pursuant to 18 U. S. C. § 241. As provided in 18 U.S.C. § 3331(a), the U.S. District Court must impanel a special grand jury when requested -and | request it for all judges involved in my case, and for all legislators involved in voting of the abusive, unethical lawsto investigate whether organized crime is occurring in the community in which it sits. This could include, for instance, organized drug activity or organized corruption in government. 3. Even if Fla. Stat. § 68.093(2)(d) were legal, for its August 9, 2017, decision finding me to be a . “quintessential litigious Plaintiff’ and for its order on October 16, 2017, Judge Garcia of CC counted wrongly and abusively to five or more my CC cases that were dismissed, while the tot