1. Automatic Preemptive Rulings and Judicial Overreach
Whether a state court violates basic principles of due process by issuing preemptive rulings —such as
transferring jurisdiction or resolving key issues —before an appeal has concluded and before the
litigant has had a full opportunity to present evidence and argument, thereby denying a meaningful
hearing "at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner. " Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank &
Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306, 314 (1950).

2. Mooting of Appellate Review Through Automatic Preemptive Transfer Orders
Whether an appellate court may issue an automatic preemptive transfer of jurisdiction —triggered by
issuance of the remittitur —while key disputed issues such as the case transfer itself, move-away,
custody, , and children 's exposure to harmful religious practices are still under appeal, thereby
mooting those claims and depriving the appellant of the right to a full and fair appellate review under
the Fourteenth Amendment.

3. Loss of Remand Authority and Foreclosure of Remedies
Whether due process is violated where, because of an automatic preemptive jurisdictional transfer to
another state, the originating state court loses the authority to remand or enforce any appellate
decision —even if the appellant prevails on appeal —thus rendering the appeal an empty formality.

4. Equal Protection and Discriminatory Fee Enforcement
Whether a state court violates the Equal Protection Clause by dismissing a father 's appeal for non
payment of court fees while allowing the mother to proceed based on a fee waiver obtained through
fraud, creating an arbitrary and discriminatory access barrier to appellate justice.

5. Gender-Based Discrimination in Family Law Proceedings
Whether systemic practices in state family courts —such as disparate treatment of mothers and
fathers in custody, credibility, and access determinations —violate the Equal Protection Clause when
fathers are routinely penalized, dismissed, or denied relief due to implicit gender bias.

Whether a state court violates due process by issuing preemptive rulings before an appeal concludes, thereby denying a meaningful hearing