Whether the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment requires that parents have an automatic 50/50 share in parental time and responsibility absent a compelling state interest

Questions Presented for Review 1. Ifeach citizen is protected under the Equal Protection Clause of | the 14t amendment of the U.S. Constitution, why would any | parent, absent compelling state interest, not automatically have their 50/50 equal share in parent time and responsibility with their child? | 2. If parental rights could only be compromised with compelling | ‘state interest,’ how is it the mother in this case was stripped | parental rights, especially in family court, while pro se, without conviction, and without due process of the law? } | 3. Ifevery man, under the 5 amendment of the U.S. Constitution, is considered innocent until proven guilty, how could he be punished | or compromised his basic fundamental parental rights to such a degree without conviction? | 4. If the Constitution secured the 10 Rights of a Child, how could any state judge be empowered to override those liberties or even override the Domestic Violence Act by using his own “discretion?” 5. Is restricting the contact between a parent and their child to only | 8 total hours per year considered child abuse? Verified Petition for Writ of Certiorari | Parties to Proceeding 6. Jaimee Carole Moore (Finley) is the appellant and biological mother of minor child K.J.F., D.O.B. 8/30/2015. 7. Jon Mark Finley is the respondent and biological father of minor child K.J.F., D.O.B. 8/30/2015.