Can a federal judge open a qui tam case that they dismissed three years ago, turning it into a criminal case against the relator?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Cana federal judge open a qui tam case that they dismissed three years ago, turning it into a criminal case against the relator? Order a disabled whistleblower into a hearing while engaging in a fishing expedition to see if the relator has further evidence or knowledge of wrong doing by Oregon and private contractors with the state of Oregon? 2. Are the Article 3 Courts subject to the Rehabilitation Act, ADA and ADAAA? Note that Congress clearly intended those statutes to apply any agency receiving federal funds and those courts are creations of Congress and their existence depends upon the will of Congress. Congress, under Article 3, could disband those courts if it wished. And merely granting access to the blind and providing wheelchair ramps DOES NOT fulfill the statutory requirements of the law and Congresses intent. Brooks should not be dictating this over and over into his iPhone and trying to edit it on an iPad later, and should not have to re-write these appeals because Susan Frimpong objects to the format not being exactly correct. Brooks is both pro se and handicapped! Because of his disabilities and poverty, Brooks does not have access to a law library or attorney or other experts who can explain Jegal minutia to him. These filings are clear enough. If there is any question, Brooks will truthfully speak with the Justices about what he intended or meant. If that isn’t good enough, appoint competent counsel to write this appeal but allow Brooks to proof read and mandate changes that inevitable creep in when lawyers are involved. Brooks is concerned with the unvarnished truth. Win or lose, Brooks and the other victims of these crimes deserve the truth. By the same token, what earthly excuse permits a district court judge to order a petitioner to the US Supreme Court to destroy filings and restart his draft from scratch or face jail? To thwart Brooks’ attempts to file this petition. For merely trying to tell the truth, this judge threatens to throw Brooks in jail. 3. With regards to #1, can a district court judge both excuse and hide homicides and bodily harm to children and foreign nationals by Oregon and its corrupt state contractors? 4. Can the federal Courts deny access to counsel in spite of petitioner being both impoverished and severely disabled? Brooks was granted informa pauperis status at the District Court when he first filed this case in 2014. When the Court broke off the unlawful termination case from the qui tam case, Brooks has granted informa pauperis status in that case, too. When the District Court engaged in unlawful conduct and Brooks attempted to appeal, the courts ignored Page 2 of 30 FRAP 24 and denied informa pauperis status, When Brooks appeared to prevail, the district court attempted to deny informa pauperis, again, by claiming that Brooks’ filing was frivolous. 5. Can Article 3 Courts capriciously ignore Congressional Mandated Protections pertaining to medical, prescription drug, laboratory, and psychiatric records? 6. Can district court judge ignore HIPAA and FTC breach notification statutes contained in 45 CFR 164.400 415 and 16 CFR 318? And, with regard to Petitioner, can the federal courts ignore the ADA and the ADAAA which Congress intended to apply to the courts? Remember the Article 3 Courts are creations of Congress and Both the Rehabilitation Act and the ADAAA require any agency receiving federal money to abide by those statutes. 7. Cana district court withhold from Congress and the Supreme Court records proving at least $2.2 billion in tax fraud, violations of HIPAA, violations of treaties the United States is signatory to? 9 W. Hening, Statutes of Virginia 377-380, 1821 comes into play here. 8. May a judge invent and preside over a case in which their two sons beat up a Brooks, a whistleblower, while leading anti-Trump riots in Portland, Oregon? Brooks drove to Portland on 03/08/2016, to pick up a hat for his wife’s birthday. Brooks was driving a clearly mar