Stacy L. Conner v. Ken Paxton, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Attorney General of Texas, et al.

Conner/ readily admits that on the surface or upon first appearances his case may not have any huge global implications/ but as a citizen feels strongly that our whole legal system is weaved into the fine fabric of our Constitution itself; and as such/ is subject to becoming unraveled by the inadvertent pluc­ king or pulling of but one loose fiber or string that might have a disastrous or unintended consequence on the entire moaic structure of every American Life.

1. ) Does our Constitution no longer protect/serve and umbrella each American Citizen equally? or at all?? Conner/ is almost willing to bet that even as diverse as the Supreme Court may seem to bez nowhere throughout the journals of its long lustrous career or history can you find the same perimeters that this case harbors. Conner's 2nd Question/ is really the most Important. Ironically its the very same Question that he has presented and asked not merely any number of times/ but no less than a dozen attempts have been made in different courts on the foundation of this concise QUESTION alone (verbatim):

2. ) "After assessing all the Facts and supporting evidence in correlation to precedent and the many statutory LAWS which govern the issue [in this Court's opinion] WAS Conner's Petition for Discretionary Review timely delivered; Yes or No?" This should be viewed as a 'certified question' of both Fact & Law in order to maintain uniformity with the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court. (unquote). Not the lower district court nor did the 5th Circuit choose to address this important question/ which fulfills:the Continuous Harm Violation Doctrine.

3. ) Does the Supreme Court still believe that a single act of depriving a citizen of his Right to due process or access to court can very well trig­ ger your judicial power to intervene? what if there's a distinct Liberty interest invested/ or at stake? Does it Really Not Matter?