Whether family court proceeded in absence of jurisdiction and absent a justiciable controversy, thereby violating the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and warranting a writ of habeas corpus

QUESTIONS PRESENTED The twelve-year parenting Covenant between Petitioner and , Respondent Owen regarding their son was impaired by the family court ; proceeding without jurisdiction, absent a justiciable controversy, and facilitating Owen’s perjury. The exercise of Petitioner's firmly held religious beliefs resulted in retaliatory constitutional violations by Respondents: family court vaguely declared Petitioner a “credible threat”; Covenant obligations were impaired; Petitioner was denied access to court records and courtrooms; Petitioner was subjected to indentured servitude and cruel punishments under. ; family court bills of pains and penalties; star chamber evidence was considered : in secret; and, a trial in absentia was held to terminate all familial contact between Petitioners. Absent in personam and subject matter jurisdiction, ‘Respondent City of Seattle enforced imprisoning restraints upon Petitioner's ‘ . liberties by filing nearly one hundred “domestic violence” charges against : Petitioner, and $300,000 in arrest warrants, because Petitioner texted his son ; ; funny memes to keep A.R.W. from committing suicide. : The questions presented are: ; 1. Whether family court proceeded in absence of jurisdiction and absent a justiciable controversy, thereby violating the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and warranting a writ of habeas corpus. 2. Whether family court impaired the obligations of contracts in violation of U.S. Const. Article I, § 10, Clause 1 by allowing, enabling, and facilitating | i Owen’s felony perjury to abrogate the parenting covenant. : 3. Whether the family court accusation of “credible threat” levied upon Petitioner was void for vagueness. 4, Whether Petitioner's right to due process was violated when court clerks and sheriff deputies barred Petitioner from case records and courtrooms. 5. Whether Respondent Keenan’s secretive consultation of the Judicial Information System constituted a de facto Star Chamber proceeding. 6. Whether family court’s trial in absentia violated Due Process. 7. Whether the coordinated discriminatory animus by judges, attorneys, and the mother of A.R.W. against Petitioner’s religious beliefs was the : direct and proximate cause of the imposition of excessive fines, or cruel and unusual punishments, upon Petitioner in violation Eighth Amendment to | the U.S. Constitution. | 8. ‘Whether family court violated U.S. Const. Article I, § 9, Clause 3 by , imposing a Bill of Pains and Penalties upon Petitioner’s class. | 9. Whether family court violated the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution by subjecting Petitioner to involuntary servitude as a condition of familial association with his minor son, A.R.W. 10. Whether a parent has the right to advocate for the rights of their minor child in federal court, and thereby seek a writ of habeas corpus to arrest the ; . unlawful imprisonment of themself and their minor child. ii PARTIES . Petitioner is A.R.W.’s father and reverend of a humble home church. Petitioner was the appellant in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, was the petitioner in the ; United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, is the plaintiff . in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, was the petitioner in the Supreme Court of Washington, was the petitioner in King County Superior Court, was the respondent in King County family court, and was petitioner and respondent in two ex parte petitions in King County Superior Court. Respondent City of Seattle (“City”) is a municipal corporation and is a defendant in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. Respondent David S. Keenan (“Keenan”) is a judge for King County Superior Court: Keenan was an appellee in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, was a respondent in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, is a defendant in the United States District Court for the Western District o