Pro se federal litigation · 2019–2026

Every contradiction.
On the record.

On May 19, 2026, the Massachusetts Appeals Court affirmed the dismissal of a pro se civil-rights complaint on the ground that "absolute immunity applies," and on the same page directed the litigant to "seek review by the United States Supreme Court" (No. 2025-P-0855) — on a record that, as the filed affidavits set out, the Family Court had already emptied: a 437-item request for admissions truncated to two docket pages, and three certified hearing transcripts first denied, then delayed, before they entered the record in a four-volume, 389-page set stamped received May 21, 2026. Motions to correct that record are pending before the Family Court and the Massachusetts Appeals Court, and the appeal is at the First Circuit (No. 26-1346).

A June 17, 2026 supplemental status affidavit, filed under 28 U.S.C. § 1746 and seeking no relief, reports a further development now part of the record before the court: the same categorical identification bar — the subject of a civil-rights complaint filed with, and now pending before, the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Civil Rights Division on June 16, 2026 — which, the affidavit states, forecloses not only lawful employment but every lawful means of receiving money.

Nothing here has been adjudicated in the litigant’s favor; every statement is what the filings assert and the public dockets show, each linking to a filed page a reader can pull and check, with the contested questions still pending.

Q1 SCOTUS

Does sovereign immunity apply to a Commonwealth when federal funds subsidize the forceful separation of American children from their parents?

Q2 SCOTUS

Does "double protecting" some citizens waive Constitutional protections for all others?

Q3 USCA1

Can Congress avoid overriding a state's immunity when presented with Civil RICO claims alleging deliberate civil-rights violations?

Q4 D. Mass.

Has a state self-abrogated sovereign immunity by deliberately obstructing continued attempts to appeal?