No. 23-6398

Imre Kifor v. Massachusetts, et al.

Lower Court: First Circuit
Docketed: 2023-12-29
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: child-custody civil-rights constitutional-rights discrimination due-process equal-protection executive-order federal-funding separation-of-powers sovereign-immunity
Key Terms:
Arbitration SocialSecurity ERISA FirstAmendment DueProcess
Latest Conference: 2024-02-23
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Is the mandate to selectively 'advance equity' (for a select few) Constitutional?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

ESTIONS PRESENTED ' : fue e$ 230 | | 1) The “Sec. 8. Affirmatively Advancing Civil Rights ... to prevent and address discrimination and advance equity for all” clause of the 2/16/2023 Presidential Executive Order! results in the predictable “equity for the rich or equity for the poor mother?” dilemma as “equity for all” is impossible by Marxist design. Is the mandate to selectively “advance equity” (for a select few) Constitutional? 2) Does sovereign immunity apply to an “LGBTQ+” Massachusetts when using federal funds to subsidize the forceful separation and alienation of innocent American children from their loving American parents? ! See -ii

Docket Entries

2024-02-26
Petition DENIED.
2024-02-08
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/23/2024.
2024-01-09
Waiver of right of respondents Massachusetts, et al. to respond filed.
2023-12-26
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 29, 2024)

Attorneys

Imre Kifor
Imre Kifor — Petitioner
Imre Kifor — Petitioner
Massachusetts
Katherine Brady DirksOffice of the Attorney General of Massachusetts, Respondent
Katherine Brady DirksOffice of the Attorney General of Massachusetts, Respondent