Whether the decision of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals violated the pro se's due process rights under the 14th Amendment by failing to properly consider the pro se's claims of racial discrimination against the private university president's refusal to issue a second master's degree certificate

QUESTION PRESENTED Briefly, the case originates from a case of Gregory ifesinachi Ezeani v. Melinda H. Reagan of the Amberton university who is the president of the institution. The pro se was a former student of the Amberton university that completed master’s degree in Agile project management. The student after completion of his master’s degree applied for second master’s admission based on the Amberton university advertisement signed into law by the president of the university that any former Amberton university student who completed master’s in Agile project management will only require to complete 12 credits to earn second master’s in master’s in managerial science because previous credit from the former studies in master's of Agile project management will be transferred into the new master’ s degree in managerial science. The master in managerial science requires 36 credits to complete in Amberton university so the graduate student will complete 12 credits and 18 credits from the previous studies from Amberton university will be transferred into the program because it is the same classes already completed with the university. The student was admitted to the second program and provided with 12 course requirement to complete and the pro se completed the 12 credit course requirement and the university issue paper showing that the classes have been completed then the student applied for graduation to : obtain the second master degree in master’s in managerial science then the university : president ordered for the certificate not to be issued because the student was a black man which violates the student 14*» amendment constitutional right as New Jersey resident studying online in Texas. The student filed a lawsuit in the Texas district for racial 2 discrimination that violates pro se constitutional rights. The district court verified the factual allegation and supporting documents then issued a summons to the Amberton university president to defend the allegation level by the pro se on racial discrimination along with the pro se submitted evidence issued by the institution that all the required credit for the award of second masters have been completed. However, instead of the defense attorney of the defendant to answer to summons issued by the court but deviated to file for dismissal of the case that the plaintiff did not state claim and the defendant did not under the color of the state law. The magistrate judge made the decision for the judge to dismiss the case by affirming the claim of the defense lawyer without following due process to hold defendant “accountable to answer to court summons because the claim of the defense lawyer violates rule 8 and 14 amendment right of the pro se. The district judge adopted the magistrate judge decision and dismissed the case. The pro se filed appeal in 5‘ circuit court and the appeal was denied on the grounds of not stating a claim and the Amberton university president not acting under the color of the state of Texas which did not conform to 14% : amendment right to equal protection right from racial discrimination. The decision of the 5t circuit appeal court violated due process right of the pro se by failure to determine if the pro se completed the academic requirement of 12 credit or not which is the basis of the argument because a white man receives 2.4 master degree certificate on completion of 12 credits and a black man who completed the same12 credit requirement as stated in the Amberton university law will be denied to 2"4 master degree certificate. This is racial discrimination that violates pro se 14» amendment right which the supreme need to review to save the : effort of this nation in stopping the presence of racial discrimination in our community. 3 THE FOLLOWING QUESTION ARE PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1. The Pro se presents that the decision of the fifth circuit court of appeal violates due process right of 14 amend right of the pro se for failure to honor its duty of car