When this case was before this Court in No. 21-7556 and this Court denying certiorari review on May 31, 2022. The Movant city of St. Louis ' removal to the Federal district court under color of federal law 28 U.S.C. S 1441 and S 1446, removal was not based upon an actual "case and controversy " not involving constitutional or federal question that was allowed to be brought to the district court under United States District Judge Stephen R. Clark 's Standing Order (Case Management) entered on March 25, 2020. A case that was allowed to come before the court which must be decided by the Federal judiciary. The Movant 's removal was not based upon the plaintiff 's pleading in the circuit court because the plaintiff 's verified complaint was not filed by the Circuit Clerk 's Office of the Twenty Second Judicial Circuit (City of St. Louis) on March 18, 2020. Movant city of St. Louis in the Federal district court filed an S 1983 civil rights claim Civil Demand for $32,000,000.00 against Jeffrey L.G. Johnson, Jerry A. Johnson, Prisoner No. 081261-8 and Joseph Johnson attested under Movant 's CIVIL COVER SHEET proffered as proof to this Court in petitioner 's Exhibits. In a removal to federal court state law controls, Movant 's S 1983 original action in movant 's removal scheme under color of federal law was without legal merit in law and fact, was legally frivolous and constituted unjust harassment of the plaintiffs. The state 's Highest Court e.g. Missouri Supreme Court) on January 31,2023, entered its order denying mandamus relief in a failure to perform the court 's superintending authority over the lower state courts, the state 's Highest Court in denying mandamus relief failed in its fiduciary duty not ordering the Circuit Clerk 's Office to perform its ministerial duty to file plaintiff 's verified complaint No. 2022-cc00594, and the circuit clerk 's failure to issue process of petitioner 's writ of habeas corpus in No. 1922-cc12348 Cause No. 76-287-A, a ministerial duty required by rules promulgated by the Missouri Supreme Court, a ministerial duty the Circuit Clerk 's Office has refused to perform. Petitioner is due estoppel relief for fraud, and estoppel tolling relief because the statute of limitation does not start to run until the state 's Highest Court has had the chance to speak e.g. res judicata final decision.

The question presented did the state 's Highest Court res judicate final decision based upon a letter under the Seal of the Missouri Supreme Court and signature of Clerk Betsy Aubuchon, a unwritten "policy " not promulgated under any rule, or binding statutory authority was facially unconstitutional on its face. THIS COURT, fiduciary duty under the 1866 Civil Rights Act, Sec. 10, is the court of last resort for the vindication of civil rights.

Whether the state's highest court's denial of mandamus relief based on an unconstitutional unwritten policy violated the petitioner's civil rights