I. Petitioner respectfully asserts that this SCOTUS will recognize these questions expose an "Unconstitutional and Discriminatory " matter of national significance : Does Wisconsin 's Medical Malpractice Non-Economic Damages CAP Law, along with similar laws in 26 other states, violate the 14th Amendment 's State Action Clause by arbitrarily abridging the constitutional right to redress and depriving citizens of equal protection and due process, ultimately forcing individuals to abandon their right to redress or proceed as disadvantaged ProSe Litigants, subsequently imposing an undue burden by making the contingency arrangement financially unviable (factor known by Defense Counsel), for personal injuiy attorneys to provide representation (see Affidavits pgs. 23-34 in Appendix), thereby effectively denying medical malpractice tort personal injury victims fair and impartial access to the courts, rendering these laws discriminatory and unconstitutional as-applied and on their face, in violation of 14th Amendment Rights, Privileges and Immunities?

A State Law that forces its citizens to abandon their Constitutional Rights to redress or tile a civil lawsuit as a Pro Se Litigant in an effort to preserve their Constitutional Rights to Redress for Wrones. while creating a disadvantage and undue burden for the citizen constitutes "Abridgment and Deprivation" violation of the 14th Amendment State Action Clause, Rights to Equal Protection and Due Process especially if it eliminates the Contingency Agreement option, available to "Similarly Situated " Tort Personal Injury Victims, to obtain Jurist Legal Counsel as a result of the inadequate compensation allocated by the Medical Malpractice Non-Economic Damages CAP Law, deemed by licensed Personal Injury Attorneys to be insufficient to cover the extensive expenses associated with litigation of complex cases like Medical Malpractice is unconstitutional.

The 14th Amendment gives everyone a right to Dm Process...In Griffen v. Griffen, 327 US. 220, 66 S. Ct 556, 90 L. Ed. 635 ; a ProSe Litigant won his case in the Supreme Court who stated...No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of...Due Process of Law; nor deny to any person...Equal Protection of the Laws. " Kenner v. GILL, 387 F.3d 689 (1968); 7Moore's Fed. Practice.

II: Pursuant to the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, which sets forth "No State Shall Make Or Enforce Any Law Which Shall Abridge ThePrivileges Orlmmatities OfGti^ens Of.Due Process CfLaw ; Nor Deny To Any Person...Equal Protection Of The Laws ".. .Petitioner respectfully asserts that this SCOTUS will recognize that these questions expose an "Unconstitutional and Discriminatory " matter of national significance: Does Wisconsin 's Medical Malpractice Non-Economic Damages CAP Law (WI§893.55 & WI§655), along with similar laws in 26 other states, violate the 14th Amendment 's State Action Clause by creating a disadvantaged classification of medical malpractice tort personal injury victims and depriving them of equal protection and due process, alternatively the CAP law, as applied and on its face, arbitrarily limits non-economic damage awards for medical malpractice tort personal injury victims, such as Ascaris Mayo, who was

Does Wisconsin's Medical Malpractice Non-Economic Damages CAP Law violate the 14th Amendment's State Action Clause by arbitrarily abridging the constitutional right to redress and depriving citizens of equal protection and due process?