Yes, it helps explain a lot. Basically, as I understand it, what happened here was that you had problems with conditions in your apartment, at least some of which were violations of the city or county building codes. You complained to your landlord and to the code enforcement office about those conditions. After that, your landlord started an eviction action and someone who works for your landlord (the building manager, I'm guessing) started harassing you and you believe that the eviction and harassment are retaliation for complaining about the code violations. Your landlord is a corporation. I'm guessing that’s the one that is incorporated in Nevada.
You mentioned two other related corporations but it is not clear how they fit into the picture here. What is the relevance of those other corporations? In your draft response to the court's show cause order, you said that all the defendants were municipal corporations and their agents. A municipal corporation means a city or county government. Nothing in your statement of facts indicates your landlord here was a city or county government. So clarify that, is the landlord a private (non-government) corporation or is your landlord a city or county?
Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. They can only hear certain kinds of claims. You have to state in your complaint what gives the court subject matter jurisdiction. That means stating the basis for jurisdiction (e.g. the part of the constitution or statute that is the basis of your claim) and most importantly stating facts that if true would give you a valid claim. You cannot just state that your case has, say, a constitutional claim. You have to state facts that would amount to a constitutional violation, too.
A federal district court cannot hear a case that involves only state law claims unless there is diversity jurisdiction. You are in Nevada, so for there to be diversity jurisdiction here ALL the defendants would have had to be citizens of some state OTHER than Nevada. Since at least one of the defendants in your case is a Nevada corporation, diversity jurisdiction is not possible here. (Even if all the defendants were outside Nevada, you would also have had to allege damages of more than $75,000 to get diversity jurisdiction, and I'm not seeing where the acts you complained about would lead to over $75,000 in damages).
Since diversity jurisdiction is not possible from the facts as I understand them, you have to instead identify a federal cause of action. A violation of the U.S. Constitution would be one kind of federal cause of action, and you alleged that in your response to the court. The problem is that your rights under the Constitution are, with very rare exceptions not applicable here, rights you have against the government. What this means is that private persons and private entities can’t violate your Constitutional rights. So if your landlord is a private corporation there cannot be any Constitutional claim here.
Some other federal claims would be suing the federal government, suing a foreign ambassador or consul, and a claim in admiralty (law of the sea). Obviously none of those exist here.
That leaves you with trying to find a federal law that the landlord violated and that gives you a right to sue for damages. You mentioned in your response to the court the federal Civil Rights Act of 1968. I assume that you are alleging more specifically that it violates the Fair Housing Act (FHA). The FHA was enacted as part of the Civil Rights Act of 1968. (If that is the Act you are alleging was violated, it would be better to specifically mention the FHA because that will make it much more apparent to the judge what the connection is between this landlord-tenant issue and federal law.) The problem you have, however, is that nothing you have stated so far is a violation of the FHA. Very generally, the FHA prohibits a landlord from discriminating against tenants on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin. The FHA also makes it illegal to coerce, intimidate, threaten, or interfere with anyone pursuing his/her rights under the FHA. What this means is that if the landlord had harassed you for making a complaint with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) about, say, race discrimination against you by the landlord you would have a remedy under the FHA for that.
But the FHA does not prohibit retaliation and harassment against tenants for making complaints about a private landlord with the local code enforcement office about code violations. Nor does any other federal law give you a cause of action for that. That is something that Nevada state law would have to provide. Just from what you said here, I'm not seeing any federal claim. This looks like something that ought to be in state court.
I am not your lawyer, though, and I’ve not gone over all the facts and evidence you have. So I cannot say for certain there is no federal claim for you. I’m just not seeing it from what you have said in this thread. I would really encourage you to meet with a Nevada lawyer who litigates civil matters in federal court to see if you can find any basis for a federal claim here and thus save your federal case. Otherwise, the federal court will have to dismiss it, and then you will have to file the case in state court instead.
