1. Daes the resont of 28 u.s.c.31ais (bl4) - a safety-valve created by congress - succomb entirely to and find defeat in 8191slg) -a seeming deterent created by congress, but evidently used as the outright absolute bar of access to counts and due process - when an indigent appellant or petitioner seeks to advance a court action of imperative pleblic /national importance for the purpose to resolve questins of federal law -per Supreme Count Rule 10 and/or 1l - In Forma Pauperis?

2. Does 34 u.s.c. 8 2pa13 (d) violate the separation-of-powers and/or nondelegation doctrine?

3. Defined as government compelled speech, given thir administrative activity and opevation, do 2 4.s.c.8 225so la) and/or SoeNA in general violate the First Amendiment?

4. Daes Petitioner have to consent to any civil contract of adhesion for any purpose that opposes his interests in freetom of speed lexpnession)leven if -for privacy-he chooses to expness nothing), AND does the Government have ang standing to compel any plrson to authorize and or execute any contrict of adlesion (regardless of motive or means of inducement), ANo are contracts of adhesion with the Government, that compel Petitioner to speak against his ovon interests, valid and/orenfoiceable?

S. Per Leary, stseg., is sorNA constitutional, and, therefore, is sorNA a law any citizen must be compliant to when it land its state-level counterparts) violate separation -of -powers and/or the First Amendment lin whke or part)?

Does the resort of 28 U.S.C. 2415(e) - a safety valve created by Congress - succumb entirely to and find defeat in 8 U.S.C. 1182(a) - a seeming inherent created by Congress, but evidently used as the outright absolute bar of access to courts and due process - when an indigent appellant or petitioner seeks to advance a court action of imperative public/national importance for the purpose to resolve questions of federal law - per Supreme Court Rule 10 and/or 11 - In Forma Pauperis