The United States Constitution grants certain inalienable rights to its citizens. The purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment is to protect people from being abused by a powerful government...and the right to due process. The Judicial Act of 1789 and 28 U.S.C. § 1654 give litigants the right to represent themselves. The Supreme Court in Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972) gave the pro se litigant the right to be heard.

The question presented is whether the Petitioners' rights were violated with respect to the Court's actions of reversing a decision and remedy granted just because an attorney suddenly appeared for the adversary, and whether those actions violated the rights granted citizens by the Fourteenth Amendment, the Judicial Act of 1789 and 28 U.S.C. § 1654, and the standards set by the United States Supreme Court in Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972).

Should a case be summarily dismissed against a self-represented litigant in deference to an attorney, without the matter being fully heard and adjudicated on the merits, if only because the litigant is self-represented and an unwarranted courtesy is being given to the attorney?

Whether a pro se litigant's case can be summarily dismissed in deference to an attorney without full adjudication on the merits