In Re Allen Watkins

To the Honorable the Chief Justice and the Associate Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States: Petitioner Allen Watkins respectfully petitions this Court for an extraordinary writ of mandamus and emergency relief under the authority of the Judiciary Act of 1789 (1 Stat. 81), the Federal Arbitration Act (43 Stat. 883-885), and Rules 14, 20, 33, 34, and 39 of the Rules of this Court. Petitioner proceeds in forma pauperis and shows that irreparable harm is immediate and ongoing, including loss of livelihood, continued license suspensions, and the threat of homelessness affecting a dependent minor child. Because arbitration conclusively resolves the merits by design, FAA § 9 leaves courts with no adjudicatory role once the statutory predicates are met; confirmation is mandatory precisely because there is nothing left for a court to decide, a ministerial duty without discretion. The Rules Enabling Act, Act of June 19, 1934, ch. 651, 48 Stat. 1064, as amended by Pub. L. 100-702, Title IV, § 401(a), Nov. 19, 1988, 102 Stat. 4648 (codified at 28 U.S.C. § 2072(b)), forbids any rule ofprocedure from abridging this substantive right Congress created. Petitioner therefore respectfully request expedited consideration and interim relief necessary to preserve rights conferred by the Acts of Congress and the Constitution of the United States (see contemporaneously filed Emergency Application for Stay and Reinstatement of Licenses 25A622). QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether, under the Federal Arbitration Act of February 12, 1925, ch. 213, § 9, 43 Stat. 883, the clerk and judge of a United States District Court have a mandatory, ministerial duty to confirm an unvacated arbitration award and lack discretion to refuse docketing or to demand a civil-action fee contrary to that statute. Page 2 of 32