Whether the unprecedented conduct of sitting Portsmouth Circuit Court judges in a sua sponte joint administrative Recusal Order violates a pro se Plaintiff's due process and equal protection rights under the 14th Amendment

1. Whether the unprecedented conduct of all the sitting judges of the Portsmouth Circuit Court in entering a “sua sponte ” joint administrative Recusal Order, refusing to exercise their judicial duty to take jurisdiction and preside over pro se Plaintiffs Civil Complaint, or any matters related thereto, subjecting pro se Plaintiff to different, altered, and unequal policies and procedures in Plaintiffs civil litigation process as compared to the litigation process of those Plaintiffs similarly situated violated Plaintiffs rights to due process and equal protection guaranteed by the 14 Amendment? 2. Whether the unprecedented conduct of all the sitting judges of the Portsmouth Circuit Court in entering a “sua sponte ” joint administrative Recusal Order, refusing to exercise their judicial duty to take jurisdiction and preside over pro se Plaintiffs Civil Complaint, or any matters related thereto, LEAVING NO CHIEF JUDGE TO PROVIDE JUDICIAL OVERSIGHT in Plaintiffs civil case violates the Constitution? 3. Whether there is a deprivation of 14 Amendment equal protection rights when there are State Supreme Court Designated Retired Judges appointed by the State Supreme Court to preside over a Plaintiffs Circuit Court Case, without the consent of the Plaintiff relative to the issue of equal judicial capability and competency in judging cases as those Plaintiffs who have Judges presiding who have been duly appointed by the legislature to currently serve. 4. Whether judicial immunity covers a judge ’s administrative conduct, when the judge ’s conduct deprives a Plaintiff of their constitutional rights? LIST OF ALL