1. Whether it violates the Constitution for a state judge without jurisdiction to reopen a closed judgment and order the prevailing judgment creditors to pay attorney's fees to Respondent Collect Co—a non-party with no legal standing whom Petitioners have never met—and, by doing so, enable collusion with clerical staff, the fabrication of writs, and the seizure of more than $1,000,000 of Petitioners' assets through sheriff auctions and bank levies?

2. Whether due process is violated when Respondent Collect Co, through collusion with a state judge and clerical staff, falsifies and alters official court records—erasing Petitioners' filings, substituting sham orders, removing evidence of fraud, and relabeling Petitioners as debtors while inserting Respondent as creditor—to obtain judicially enforced seizures of Petitioners' property?

3. Whether due process is violated when a state judge and clerical staff, acting in alignment with Respondent Collect Co, threaten prevailing judgment creditors with loss of their home, financial ruin, or imprisonment to coerce compliance with unlawful orders?

4. Whether due process is violated when a state judge without jurisdiction reopens a closed case at the request of Respondent Collect Co—a non-party with no legal standing—and, acting on that request, declares the prevailing judgment creditors "vexatious litigants" and issues a pre-filing injunction that bars them from court while enabling the continued seizure of more than one million dollars of their assets?

Whether it violates the Constitution for a state judge without jurisdiction to reopen a closed judgment and order the prevailing judgment creditors to pay attorney's fees to a non-party, and enable collusion, fabrication of writs, and seizure of assets?