May the State of Georgia impose punitive sanctions against an attorney petitioning the courts and speaking out in public to expose and redress state government corruption?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED While preparing his 2017 petition to this Court against Georgia’s assertion of sovereign immunity protection for crimes by state officials, Petitioner Anthony Tricoli discovered new evidence infecting the judgment, including the Georgia Attorney General obstructing investigation of a scheme in the state university system to defraud federal programs—and blocking a hearing due Tricoli to conceal the fraud. When Tricoli filed a motion to set aside the state court judgment, trial court Judge Coursey barred all evidence and granted a motion for sanctions against Tricoli, disregarding a statutory prohibition against imposing sanctions for a position supported by recognized authority. The trial court also ignored Tricoli’s motion for First Amendment protection against government retaliation. Georgia’s Attorney General never filed a responsive pleading to Tricoli’s motion documenting USG fraud on the federal government and obstruction by the Attorney General. The Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed the sanctions without opinion and denied the First Amendment motion and uncontested motion to set aside as barred by the challenged judgment itself. After five Georgia Supreme Court Judges who attempted to rule against Tricoli were disqualified, the remainder of the court refused to hear the case. The Questions Presented are: 1. May the State of Georgia impose punitive sanctions, against an attorney petitioning the courts and speaking out in public to expose and redress state government corruption, while completely disregarding the state’s own statute for First Amendment protection against government retaliation? ii 2. Is it unacceptable and impermissible, under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, for the State to impose such punitive sanctions in disregard of Georgia’s own First Amendment protection statute, while also ignoring Georgia’s statutory prohibition against imposing sanctions for taking a legal position supported by recognized or even persuasive authority? 3. Did Georgia courts violate Fourteenth Amendment due process and the First Amendment right to petition by denying an uncontested motion to set aside for fraud and due process violations affecting the judgment, on a pretextual basis without a judicial opinion addressing the law and facts of the uncontested motion, while also affirming without opinion the denial of First Amendment protection and the imposition of punitive sanctions, contrary to Georgia’s own controlling statutes?