PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Whether the Takings Clause of the FIFTH AMENDMENT to the U.S. Constitution either alone or through the FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT applies to a state supreme court’s long suspension of a law license amounting to 7 years where no mitigating fact was considered and no crime or dishonest act was alleged against the disabled attorney so punished and another state wholly rejected the suspension. Whether the mere fact that a state supreme court, Indiana’s in this case, can suspend a lawyer means that it is impossible for that lawyer to seek property takings compensation under the Takings Clause, as Indiana’s Court of Appeals has effectively held in 2023. Petitioner alleges that without Takings protections separate from the disciplinary process, law licenses are stripped of their property status. Only state and federal courts can take this property. Whether, when a state supreme court has no original jurisdiction to compensate property under the state constitution, an original jurisdiction law license suspension cannot be considered the same matter as a property compensation lawsuit for that suspension. Thus, when no compensation is possible simultaneously with a suspension, a later property takings lawsuit must be allowed to vindicate Takings Clause rights, especially when the law license takings suspension was extreme in length and not justified by the facts of the suspension case (no crime or dishonest act and no consideration at all of miti