No. 23-6337

Mahfooz Ahmad v. Colin Day, et al.

Lower Court: Second Circuit
Docketed: 2023-12-22
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Relisted (2)IFP
Tags: 28-usc-2284 arbitration-agreement civil-rights constitutional-rights district-court district-court-composition federal-arbitration-act federal-law-challenge ninth-amendment seventh-amendment
Latest Conference: 2024-03-22 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)

1. What does 28 U.S. Code § 2284 mandate regarding the composition of a district court when an action challenges the constitutionality of a federal law?

2. Whether the Federal Arbitration Act of 1925, as outlined in 9 U.S.C. § 2.3.4, violates the constitutional protections established in the Seventh and Ninth Amendments of the United States Bill of Rights, particularly in civil rights cases.

a. Whether this Court, in its capacity as the Supreme Court of the land, should redefine the contours of the Federal Arbitration Law to confine its immediate applicability to corporate-to-corporate arbitration.

b. Whether, in light of corporate entities deliberately misusing the 'intent' and 'purpose' underpinning the Federal Arbitration Act, this Court must categorically prohibit its invocation in the context of employment and consumer proceedings.

Question Presented (AI Summary)

What does 28 U.S. Code § 2284 mandate regarding the composition of a district court when an action challenges the constitutionality of a federal law?

Docket Entries

2024-03-25
Rehearing DENIED.
2024-03-06
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/22/2024.
2024-02-22
Petition for Rehearing filed.
2024-02-20
Petition DENIED.
2024-02-01
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/16/2024.
2023-12-18
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 22, 2024)

Attorneys

Mahfooz Ahmad
Mahfooz Ahmad — Petitioner