Roger Swartz v. Board of Trustees of University of Pennsylvania, et al.

i Appeal from the Decision, Order and Judgment of The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit to require that Roger Swartz’s minor children A.S. and E.A.S. be represented by counsel for claims Roger Swartz brings on behalf of his children A.S. and E.A.S. a 5-year-old child from the Memorandum-Decision and Order and Judgment of The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania by Judge Edwardo Rubreno entered on March 23, 2022 and Action No. 22-1568. QUESTIONS PRESENTED

1. When one learns the practice of law limited through experiential learning because they have been deprived of their 14th Amendment Rights and many other rights by State Actors do they have has a right to function as a lawyer in the same way as lawyers that have trained in law school and passed the Bar?

2. In cases where defendants-respondents are deeply resourced and have a history of meddling into the affairs of others by influencing them to break the law without boundaries establishing there is a very high likelihood they will illegally meddle into the affairs of any council assigned to represent minor children and likely compel them to undermine the case does that provide a basis for a parent with nontraditional attorney training to represent their child?