Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Deloris Phillips v. Texas Department of Insurance, Division of Workers' Compensation
IFP petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, No. 24-11102 · judgment February 17, 2025
Question presented
Did the United States District Court of the Northern District of Texas Dallas Division unconstitutionally err in labeling petitioner vexatious-frivolous, without one hearing on the merits. Would petitioner have been granted one hearing on the merits, if petitioner could have afforded an attorney of record v. in forma pauper. Is denying due process solely because of one’s economic/social class specifically explained/expressed in the Constitution of the United States. Is obvious bias of the poor/in forma pauper a flaw of fallacy that requires correction to ensure the rule of law is duly protected for all (beyond economic/social class). 14th Amendment-Equal Protection. Sec. 1. Rights All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law! nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. 18 U.S.C. § 241 Conspiracy against rights 18 U.S.C. § 242 Deprivation of rights under color of law. 42 U.S.C. § 1985 addresses conspiracy to interfere with civil rights, eg. Deter witnesses; depriving equal protection 42 U.S.C. § 1986 addresses the liability for neglecting to prevent civil rights violations
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Deloris Phillips
For respondent
—
Proceedings
- Nov 17 2025The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, and the petition for a writ of certiorari is dismissed. See Rule 39.8. As the petitioner has repeatedly abused this Court's process, the Clerk is directed not to accept any further petitions in noncriminal matters from petitioner unless the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) is paid and the petition is submitted in compliance with Rule 33.1. See Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 506 U. S. 1 (1992) (per curiam).
- Oct 30 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/14/2025.
- Jul 17 2025Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 16, 2025)
- Mar 26 2025Application (24A906) granted by Justice Alito extending the time to file until July 17, 2025.
- Mar 15 2025Application (24A906) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from May 18, 2025 to July 17, 2025, submitted to Justice Alito.