Is it a violation of the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment on Freedom of Speech or abuse of power when Workers' Compensation Commissioners during hearings circumvent, alter or veers from docketed hearing issues from injured workers' filed claims (our voices in court), or commission and appellate court opinions separate from docketed hearing issues?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED I. Is it a violation of the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment on Freedom of Speech or abuse of power when Workers’ Compensation Commissioners during hearings circumvent, alter or veers from docketed hearing issues from injured workers’ filed claims (our voices in court), or commission and appellate court opinions separate from docketed hearing issues? Further, never enforcing own opinions awarding © Petitioner life-medicals disobeyed by Respondents since 2016 opinion. Whether a malversation of this case vacating opinion considering Title 18, U.S.C. Section 241Conspiracy Against Rights, Section 242-Deprivation of Rights, Section 245Federally Protected Activities? Whether not reviewing systematically creates/worsens comfort level of depriving claimants Fourteenth Amendment-Due Process of the Laws simultaneously harming the health of disabled injured worker and all claimants nationwide by evaporating our voices in courtfreedom of speech? II. The Worker's Compensation Act inscribes rights for injured workers. The commissions duty is to protect and enforce. Yet, many disabled injured workers nationwide suffer having “no way out” with our life-long medicals (awarded) when our rights and healthcare are not being protected by the commission. Should the commission be removed from this 8 % yearlong manipulative case, and others alike, possibly setting a precedent in protecting disabled injured workers from years of abuse, for the sake of Human Rights, Civil Rights, The Disabilities Act, protecting the Constitution, and citizens belief in the justice system? ii Ill. Considering Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S.519, 520 (1972), pro se litigants’ area to be held “to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers.” Can an objection be implied for pro se litigant at hearing or trial when we verbally correct an incorrect statement by a commissioner or judge? iii