Fugitives' right to sue

1. Whether the Eleventh Circuit’s application of the fugitive disentitlement doctrine was unjustified and unconstitutional? 2. Whether the Eleventh Circuit’s application of the fugitive disentitlement doctrine departed from this Court’s precedent in Degen v. United States, 517 U.S. 820 (1996) and Hovey v. Elliott, 167 U.S. 409 (1897)? 3. Whether the Eleventh Circuit abused its discretion in not issuing a written opinion when issuing the severe sanction of fugitive disentitlement in a civil case? 4. Whether Petitioner’s entitlement to injunction under 42 U.S.C. § 12203(a)-(c), as established by the admission to liability by the State Respondents in their answer brief, outweighs the policy objectives of the fugitive disentitlement doctrine? 5. Whether the doctrine of vindictive prosecution outweighs the application of the fugitive disentitlement doctrine in a civil case? 6. Whether a remand order appealed under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d), like the orders at issue in Coinbase, is subject to an automatic stay pending appeal? 7. If so, whether the Writ of Bodily Attachment issued by the State Respondents in the related case, that the Eleventh Circuit used as the basis for its application of the fugitive disentitlement doctrine in the instant case, is void ab initio for lack of jurisdiction?