Unconstitutional gag on claims and defenses

QUESTION PRESENTED When an officer of the court, indefinity stays a case of significance, for example from 2015 to 2023 (8 years), is this an unconstitutional gag on the claims and defenses of the Petitioner and contrary to the Constitutional right (in the First Amendment) to "petition the government for the redress of grievances"? Precedence was established in 1844, reference unconstitutional gag rules used by congress to indefinitely table all petitions. ; See ("Struggles over Slavery: The "Gag" Rule". The U.S. National Archives and Records Administration.)