Jerry Lee Canfield v. Bobby Lumpkin, Executive Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, et al.

Did the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ignore and/or misconstrue the precedents of this Court by holding: : the Plaintiff failed to show imilarly situated individuals and his class-of-one claim fails?”

Over two decades ago, this Court made a statement and conclu­ sion in Mckune v. Lile, and Connecticut Dept, of Pub. Safety v. Doe, that "sex offenders are a serious thfeat in this nation” and based this conclusion on an outdated fact that "when con-e­ victed sex offenders re-enter society, they are much more likely than any Other type of offender to be re-arrested for a new .. rape or sexual assault.” Should this Court revisit and change this statement and conclusion because the facts relied upon to come up with this rationale are no longer accurate, true, dr reliable; but now, objective facts declares the complete op­ posite? Mckune v. Lile, 536 U.S. 24, 32 (2002); Connecticut : Dept, of Pub. Safety v. Doe, 538 U.S. 1, 4 (2003).

Did the lower Courts abuse their discretion, by denying the Petitioner the option to replead his best case?