Sustained Violations Of Title VI Civil Rights
The Family Court’s never communicated “gatekeeper orders” are arbitrary, untraceable, and unappealable ...
Motion For Injunction
The Family Court’s capricious or never communicated ad hoc “gatekeeper orders” are arbitrary, untraceable, and unappealable (they are not based on statutes) instruments that are the definition of targeted discrimination and silencing retaliation “backdoors” into the Family Court’s activist “legal machinery” that Title VI was intended to prevent and specifically eradicate.
The continually repeated RICO predicate acts, i.e., retaliations and mail (and wire) fraud, and the arbitrary “gatekeeper orders” not just directly infringe on but also deny Father’s constitutional rights for due process and equal protection in his existentially significant interactions with the activist and discriminating “under the color of law” Family Court. Specifically, not knowing if Father’s filings and relevant evidence are ever even considered by the Family Court and then being completely unable to find out about the Family Court’s decisions is precisely what the “conspiracy to silence and enslave” was meant to convey.
The State continues to openly divert significant federal assistance to finance this activist “experiment,“ a targeted discrimination based on national origin in Father’s specific case, armed with purpose-fabricated “mental health” fraud.
In the case of the class, the generic discrimination would take other forms, but the core discrimination against the “men who know with certainty” that they cannot get pregnant yet want connections with their children would be shared.
After two interventions by the Single Justice Mass. Appeals Court, the Family Court finally resorted to the “you need permission to file on these cases” deliberately arbitrary, capricious, and whimsical “gatekeeper orders,“ pursuant to “an abuse of discretion is defined in this circuit as a judicial action which is arbitrary, capricious, or whimsical. United States v. Wright,” Pelican Production Corp. v. Marino, 893 F.2d 1143 (10th Cir. 1990), see attached.
While Father has unsuccessfully attempted to appeal the 6/13/2019 “gatekeeper order” in the parallel case, as it was based on the discriminatory “he is dangerous, writes too much, and is not cogent” direct reference to Father’s immigrant Romanian national origin and his purpose fabricated “possible mental health” problems, the order was current and therefore respected.
However, the Family Court never communicated any such orders, until the 3/7/2023 response from the Register, in the critical [other] matter, as the victimized layman mother felt the need to testify in the Family Court on 3/23/2023 that “the Court made me file” the repeated deliberately frivolous and damaging complaints for contempts against an indigent Father.
- an abbreviated and redacted copy.