Whether the United States District Court unconstitutionally denied due process to a petitioner based on economic/social class and lack of legal representation

Did the United States District Court of the Northern District of Texas Dallas Division unconstitutionally err in labeling petitioner without one hearing on the merits. Would petitioner have been granted one hearing on the merits, if petitioner could have afforded an attorney of record v. in forma pauper. Is denying due process solely because of one ’s economic/social class specifically explained/expressed in the Constitution of the United States. Is obvious bias of the poor/in forma pauper a flaw of fallacy that requires correction to ensure the rule of law is duly protected for all (beyond economic/social class). 14th Amendment-Equal Protection. Sec. 1. Rights All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law! nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. 18 U.S.C. § 241 Conspiracy against rights 18 U.S.C. § 242 Deprivation of rights under color of law. 42 U.S.C. § 1985 addresses conspiracy to interfere with civil rights, eg. Deter witnesses; depriving equal protection 42 U.S.C. § 1986 addresses the liability for neglecting to prevent civil rights violations II