Question not identified.

This journey centers around the teachings of Jesus Christ and Judicial Officers who became the parable of the unjust judge who hated the words of Jesus Christ and the Coptic who brought this case Bochra v. U.S. Department of Education (l:21-cv-03887) which also centers around Jesus Christ within the IHRA definition. See petition status with the Supreme Court in 24-5703 (the sin of human choice to hear or not to hear) although Mark is planning to file a Petition for Writ Mandamus under Rule 20 pertaining to the same case; this time the Supreme Court can ask the Solicitor General under President Trump his thoughts regarding the IHRA definition which to this very day congress are fighting over the definition. 4 It was this case which gave rise to “evil” when Mark ’s home was the first target, later his place of work at Chicago Public School, and later him and his case was the last target to the point Mark was placed permanently on high blood pressure medication; Mark suffered both financial and emotional loss yet he asked for healing but it was rejected because of their pride. What happened in this journey was tested when Mark told many “go and sin no more ” but their pride was in the way. They accepted sin as the norm, and they rejected light as darkness and from where to start and how it should end? “Repeated attacks are often understood as a signal to act—just as King Henry II's remark, Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest? ” In light of 22-1025 Gonzalez v. Trevino 5, at which given point can the judicial branch can declare that retaliation took place after the victim reports discrimination. The continuous discrimination with retaliation in this case did not just took place using the Court official capacity when the Executive Committee through Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer warned Mark not to speak about Jesus Christ but the continuous targeting of Mark directly and covertly waived immunity for many judicial officers, especially when they all gathered to get rid of Mark by means of first they must destroy Mark ’s civil right case in Bochra v. U.S. Department of Education (l:21-cv-03887) and later restrain the victim from speaking up to the Court in both the District and the 7th Circuit which this Court tried to address in 20-197 Biden v. Knight First Amendment Institute at Colombia University et al6 when it declared a President can’t block a user from interacting with the President using twitter because it is constitutionally protected public forum, the same way in here, the Court is a public forum. See also AFLF vs. John G Roberts et al l:25-cv-01232. The questions presented are: In light of the recent S