I. Whether the "due process of law" clause of Amendment XIV gives a local government the burden to secure state judicial approval for its official deprivation of property, such that, absent approval, res judicata is no bar to a due process claim.

II. Whether Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(a)(6) and the clear error standard prevent the Eleventh Circuit from replacing the undisputed property interest found at issue by the District Court (sale of toucans) with its own unelaborated de novo finding of a non-property privilege (building permit).

III. Whether the Eleventh Circuit's refusal on rehearing to correct or justify this erroneous replacement denies the "due process of law" guarantee in Amendment V that the United States shall not deprive a property interest (in a §1983 cause of action) without judicial approval of the challenged deprivation (sale of toucans).

Whether a county board of commissioners' voting procedures and redistricting decisions violate constitutional protections of equal representation and voting rights