Robert L. Schulz v. Town Board of the Town of Queensbury, et al.

Whether the lower Court has misapplied Minne­ sota State Bd. for Community Colls, v. Knight, 465 U.S. 271 (1984) in ruling Respondent Town Board was not obligated to respond to Petitioner’s First Amendment Petition for Redress of its knowingly false entries in a written instrument constituting a record of its public office.

Whether the lower Court has overlooked Garcetti v. Ceballos, 457 U.S. 410 (2006) and Borough of Duryea u. Guarnieri, 564 U.S. 379 (2011) in ruling the Town Board was not obligated to respond to said Petition for Redress.

Whether the lower Court has overlooked the His­ torical Record of the Petition Clause in ruling the Town Board was not obligated to respond to said Petition for Redress.

Whether Petitioner’s Right to a “Republican Form of Government,” guaranteed by Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution for the United States, was infringed when Respondent Town Board made knowingly false entries in a written instrument constituting a record of its public office, and re­ fused to respond to Petitioner’s First Amendment Petition for Redress of the violations.

Whether a State statute can deprive a citizen of the United States of the protections afforded by the Guarantee and Petition Clauses.