Whether the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District violated the petitioner's constitutional rights, including the First Amendment right to free speech, by denying the petitioner a fair trial and hearing

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED ; ‘| AN told The U.S. Disereed Cours For ihe Rastetn Orvsveney Thao” Mm a ae Pm) heke Ware Qn @anger By TO.C-d. officials why ff Didwr hey Welp we y Su a ot T Fon Whe Eaevarn Qigutred 2.) 4 16 the u-S.Wigrtier Coutv Tet 4 Kagvetn Qise thar bt Knot nevhing ahoux the hacd | b ask The u-S— 7 Cf 4 : _ Fl. at Coute. vo APownse Me 2 CounSel 10 help me t we — —_* “ ue t Coftecr Clams and Corfece hegal movions < AY r — ‘oo —— 3.) why : didnt The U-S.Disetcet Coury Foe Vhe Kasietn + me ory a — * ae . Drsetrer ablouo} me a Fait vtial and allow mea 2 _ _ _ z Heating , of Chance Vo Presenr The Stat us. tnesS ms 4.) why 2 @id The us. Qisverer Court For “the Fasicen Giscret Denve Rvety movion ¥Y File 72 . 5.) why t Did The us. WieteceT court Foe The FasvernGQisiteet — et — Violate. our Constriutronal haw “the Fest Amendment Freedom of Speech | Pree Speech, the u.s.Qisriret Court Reva Tv Ni atieert ‘ v \iaved Agaimesi the Prisonet Thee $9 eech why 2 G, Tit 2 ‘ — — — “ ‘ i “ — ) Mh MS Qrisveret Court ned & Special Dangel Fxisied Ind STH Denied . 3 9 case. wh : me a Fair Chanee 10 fove mg ») J Dente me a Fair thanee 76 D pov my Case... 1.) why 1S the us. Oisterel Court Discriminating ‘hx Ls les TS a 7 8 ‘e / Ah ? neleqenT. Pro SE: ran Conrinuing ad FP A PpPpea ws 5° ~ c ‘ . y Dente Nima Fair chance TS Pheve | Ais caSe dhy : . < 8.) Why?! if he U.S. Court of apy eal also Retalhare and 4 XK ' _? — ‘ De nie The Madi gent Pro Sk. an Continuing on apperl