No. 21-6317
Clayton G. Walker v. Steve Barnett, South Dakota Secretary of State, et al.
IFP
Tags: amendment-interpretation candidate-rights constitutional-access election election-rights equal-protection judicial-procedure jurisdiction mask-mandate writ-of-mandamus
Key Terms:
DueProcess FourthAmendment
DueProcess FourthAmendment
Latest Conference:
2022-01-14
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Should everyone have the same Access During the Pandemic.
2. Should Walker as a Candidate for United States Sente be grated the same rights as other when it comes to a Pacer Account?
3. Are the rights of a candidate that is treated differently during an election, violate the equal protection clause of the 9th and 14th Amendment?
4. Was it Constitutional for our Governor Kristy Noem to be the only State that didn 't require Mask Mandates?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Question not identified
Docket Entries
2022-01-18
Petition DENIED.
2021-12-30
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/14/2022.
2021-11-01
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 17, 2021)
Attorneys
Clayton Walker
Clayton G. Walker — Petitioner