Court access for abuse survivors

1. Whether a state court violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act when it: (a) relies on an uncertified, court-employee-prepared document—derived from a Limited English Proficient (LEP) domestic violence survivor without a certified interpreter — to override her sworn testimony and alter marital property rights; and (b) systematically fails to provide language access, structural trial recordings, or transcripts to an indigent pro se litigant under Griffin v. Illinois. 2. Whether Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the ADAAA require state courts to provide effective communication and reasonable accommodations for non-visible disabilities to legal guardians appearing on behalf of disabled adult wards, and whether a written administrative policy categorically excluding "families" from ADA accommodations violates federal law. 3. Whether a state court violates Due Process and the fundamental right of access to the courts under Griffin v. Illinois and Bounds v. Smith when it excludes 180 pages of a pro se litigant ’ s filed evidence from the appellate transfer —and the appellate court subsequently applies an evidentiary presumption against the litigant based on the resulting court-created gap. 4. Whether a state court violates the Fourteenth Amendment and VAWA (34 U.S.C. § 12291) when it: (a) consolidates domestic violence proceedings into a dissolution case over objection and enters a permanent property decree in absentia—after denying discovery, routing notices to the abuser's physical address while denying electronic access to a homeless victim, and erasing all domestic violence findings without holding a hearing; and (b) systematically suppresses law enforcement records from the originating domestic violence incident across all levels of review.