1. Can federal courts, consistent with the Consti
tution, assume legislative authority by creating fed
eral common law on judicial immunity, filing re
strictions, or student loan bankruptcy remedies, vio
lating separation of powers under Egbert v. Boule,
142 S. Ct. 1793 (2022) when upholding the unconsti
tutionally vague 11 U.S.C. §523(a)(8) and the uncon
stitutional Department of Education?

2. Do actions by Chief Judge Bumb, Judge
Sanchez, Judge Vazquez, and others, including dis
missing complaints, restricting filings, upholding
non-statutory bankruptcy remedies, and modifying
supervised release, constitute First Amendment re
taliation by limiting court access and punishing peti
tioner 's challenges to illegal student loan collection
and the Department of Education 's authority?

3. Are judicial actors and probation officers im
mune when engaging in legislative, enforcement, or
ad- ministrative acts, such as applying the Brunner
test {Brunner v. New York State Higher Education
Services Corp., 831 F.2d 395 (2d Cir. 1987)), retaliat
ing against First Amendment activities, or censoring
evidence to protect the unconstitutional enforcement
of § 523(a)(8) and the Department of Education?

Whether federal courts can create federal common law on judicial immunity and student loan bankruptcy remedies in violation of separation of powers, and whether judicial actors are immune from First Amendment retaliation claims