ISSUE I.
ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAWS VOID
AB INITIO REQUIRING RETROSPECTIVE
TREATMENT OF OPINIONS AFFECTING
FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS?

ISSUE II.
DO MICHIGAN COURTS HAVE AUTHORITY TO
DECLARE SUBJECT-MATTER JURISDICTION
"IRRELEVANT" TO CIVIL CONTEMPT
SANCTIONS?

ISSUE III.
IS SUBJECT-MATTER JURISDICTION WAIVED
BY FAILURE TO EXHAUST ADMINISTRATIVE
APPELLATE REMEDIES?

ISSUE I V.
DOES THE PURSUIT OF THIS CASE
CONSTITUTE A CLASS-OF-ONE EQUAL
PROTECTION VIOLATION?

ISSUE V
DOES THE COURT'S REFUSAL TO FIND
A "LAWFUL ORDER" REQUIRED BY THE
CONTEMPT STATUTE, A VIOLATION OF
DUE PROCESS?

ISSUE VI
IS THERE ANY AUTHORITY UNDER THE
SUPREMACY CLAUSE FOR CONTEMPT OF AN
UNCONSTITUTIONAL STATUTE ?

Are unconstitutional laws void ab initio requiring retrospective treatment of opinions affecting fundamental rights?