Whether forced removal from a residence constitutes a de facto capital case due to significant deprivation of court access and constitutional rights

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Supreme Court Rule 14.1(a) 1 Given forced removal from a residence imbues significant deprivation of access to the courts through denial of address, mail, and standing, and thereby obstructs the path to justice, does such kind of civil death render wrongful ejectment disputes as being treatable as a CAPITAL CASE as prescribed by the courts rules and the court’s MEMORANDUM TO THOSE INTENDING TO PREPARE A PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI IN BOOKLET FORMAT ... ” issued in January 2023? 2 Does the forcing of a proceeding under a magistrate in the District of Columbia Courts without a party’s consent constitute a violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution for the United States, and the Takings Clause? 3 Ina dispute where the amount in controversy exceeds Twenty Dollars, does the forcing of a proceeding under magistrates, with no occasion for discovery, or counterclaim, and no access to a jury, violate the First, Third, Seventh, and Fourteenth Amendments? 4 Does forcing a proceeding without establishing personal or subject matter jurisdiction violate the First, Third, Fifth, Seventh, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments? 5 Does the taking and handing off of a person’s personal property, and erasing of her rights, under false allegation of a debt, violate the Taking Clause? 6 Does blocking, or ejecting a Petitioner from their home without a writ, a violation of the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution for the United States of America? (ii) . x .