Shall any State, by her Legislature, heedlessly dictate with equity's injunction — that any one person is not protected by state and federal Constitutions — until death intervene?

QUESTION PRESENTED Shall any State, by her Legislature, heedlessly dictate with equity’s injunction — that any one person is not protected by state and federal Constitutions — until death intervene? -iiPARTIES Petitioner, Isaac Koch, was appellant in the lower appellate proceedings and respondent in District . Court. Father is current on his child support tax. ‘ Respondents are Andela, Lydia, and Josiah Koch. In our Nebraska’s Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, your respondents were appellees. In the trial court that denied the motion and issued the order, they are the petitioners. At law, Andela is wife to husband, Isaac, as of writing. Lydia and Josiah are the biologi: cal children of the couple... children of whom each nominal spouse presently shoulders joint legal custody, as the reviewing Court found just. Mother, though custodian of her other children, did not join them to the above-captioned case. PROCEEDINGS BELOW Supreme Court of Nebraska, A-21-540, Koch v. Koch, hearing denied January 13, 2022, App.12a. ; Court of Appeals of Nebraska, A-21-540, Koch v. Koch, appeal dismissed November 23, 2021, App.11a. District Court of Platte County, Nebraska, CI20504, Koch v. Koch, motion overruled May 26, 2021, : App.10a. District Court of Platte County, Nebraska, C120504, Koch v. Koch, order modifying May 20, 2021, App.6a. District Court of Platte County, Nebraska, CI20504, Koch v. Koch, order affirming December 21, 2020, no citation. District Court of Platte County, Nebraska, CI20504, Koch v. Koch, initial order December 10, 2020, App.1a. BASIS FOR JURISDICTION Please examine the order of the Nebraska Supreme Court entered January 13, 2022. No orders regarding rehearing or extension exist. The U.S. Constitution, . Article III, Section 2, vests jurisdiction in this Court ; , to hear all cases in equity arising under the authority of Constitution aforesaid. AGREEMENTS The dispute concerns equity, and the Constitution, ; Laws, and Treaties are not drawn into question, nor vest any authority for the grievance for which this petition seeks redress. STATEMENT OF CASE Your respondents sought a Civil Protection Order ; proscribing, inter alia, all of Petitioner’s “communication” and “contact” for “one year”. App.4a. Like a gen: tleman, the petitioner civilly applied to the District . Court to modify the order to allow divorce mediation. Again—and now, advising of his wish to answer the respondent’s telephone calls, he moved to modify what we aver are unconstitutional provisions in equity within the package of a CPO. But then, District Court : denied him a hearing. App.10a. The Court of Appeals dismissed his appeal. App.11a. The Supreme Court of Nebraska denied a hearing. App.12a. With the expiration of the injunction scheduled, Mr. Koch moved to renew the CPO, for the purpose of appeal, expressly preserving his rights. But it took interest from momma to secure it. He then took an appeal directly on the powers asserted by the State. But these events are not in this record, nor are said powers drawn into this question. The only question is: Cannot either party move to modify an injunction? -2DISCUSSION In the equivalent to a hastily-built theater —a modern marriage — sometimes a fire breaks out. “Fire!” and there is a mad rush to the door. Perhaps, it is in. cumbent upon the People to ensure that Liberty is not trampled in the mélée. . State Power orders one person to excise his tongue, but only when the complainant(s) will hear—or, only when what the subject says will get back to her. Forget about Marriage. A State Court tells State Power that it is now a crime for the subject not to retreat from the complainant or complainants. Kiss the baby goodbye? You felon! “But plainly [the world’s essential] community[, a family,] cannot be restrained from discussing a subject intimately affecting life within it.” Nebraska Press Assn v. Stuart, 427 U.S. 539, 566 (1976). So the only solution obvious -to our legislators seems to be making the CP