Whether a warrant and license suspension issued without probable cause violates the Fourth Amendment and constitutes a violation of constitutional rights under color of law

1. What is the nature and the cause of action for Mark Braunlich to issue a warrant on June 11, 2019, and to issue a license suspension on February 13, 2020, for the petitioner, Bryant, without probable cause and violating all the elements of the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution; and attempting to kidnap the petitioner under color of law by issuing the warrant? 2. If the action is civil and there is lack of sworn complaint by an injured party, where is the jurisdiction to issue the warrant with no injured party? 3. If the action is criminal, then is it criminal jurisdiction under Common Law, if so, where is the sworn complaint by an injured party? 4. Or, is it a criminal jurisdiction under Admiralty or Military Tribunal venue from Article 1, Section 8, of the U.S. Constitution, and if so, where is the international contract between the petitioner and respondents and; does the Sixth Amendment grant the petitioner the right to know the jurisdiction being applied to issue a warrant and license suspension order? ii 5. When Annamarie Osment and Mark Grummon did not respond to the petitioners ’ legal documents, Motion to Show Cause and Bill of Lading, asking respondents to issue a court date, dismiss the case for lack of personal and subject matter jurisdiction, no injured party with a sworn complaint or a contract with a wet signature, did the respondents violate the petitioners Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution when they denied the petitioner due process, the right to a speedy and public trial, and to be informed of the nature and the cause of the accusations, and to be confronted with a witness against him? 6. Is there criminal action under statutory jurisdiction, and if so, is statutory jurisdiction established in the United States Constitution; and how can Braunlich proceed with issuing a warrant against a living man, if there is no such action in the United States Constitution. If state law contradicts the Constitution, is state law null and void according to the Supremacy Clause Article VI, Clause 2? 7. Did Mark Braunlich bring the action of issuing a warrant and suspending all licenses against the petitioner under a secret jurisdiction known to licensed attorneys? 8. If the respondents are being sued in their individual capacity for violating the U.S. iii Constitution does absolute immunity, judicial immunity or quasi judicial immunity apply if the respondents have violated the petitioners U.S. Constitutional rights and conspired and retaliated against the petitioner under color of law? 9. Did the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, erroneously apply a presumption that the respondents are sued in their official capacities by affirming the district court ’s order, while in conflict with Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, Biggs v. Meadows, 66 F.3d 56 (4^ Cir. 1995)? 10. This case is not about state court proceedings. It is about multiple violations of the petitioners U.S. Constitutional rights being violated by the respondents ’ multiple times, since June 11, 2019, when a warrant was issued without probable cause. How could respondents argue that there was a final state court judgment when the petitioner was still receiving documents about the warrant and license suspensions from respondents until February 1, 2024, and another document stating monies owed on September 6, 2025. How is this a final state court judgment? How does the RookerFeldman doctrine apply when a final judgment resolves all disputes between the parties in a case?