Whether Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 9 violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by conferring plenary power on a single decision-maker to initiate disciplinary actions against an attorney without review or written standards

1. Whether the Tennessee Supreme Court erred in failing to hold that Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 9, the enforcement provision for alleged ethical violations of attorneys, violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. A. Whether this Court should exercise its supervisory authority to cull Tennessee’s Supreme Court, which has a history of misapprehending federal Due Process in licensure cases, out of its unconstitutional morass to proper adherence with long-standing holdings of this Court. B. Whether this Court should exercise its discretion to grant certiorari to consider a novel question of law as to Rule 9’s facial unconstitutionality in that it confers plenary power on one person, determining without review or a written standard to apply as the sole decision-maker, whether or not to initiate disciplinary actions against an attorney when the issuance of the license to practice law in the first instance confers a federal Due Process liberty and property interest to the holder.