Just pointing to there being ego which is balancing id and superego, without really explaining what the id forces might have been pushing King to do versus what the superego forces would push.

Your description of the biographical information is mostly clear.  The application of the theories is not very deep, though.  You do include some of the concepts from the theories you chose to use, but mostly just pointed to them.  I didn’t get any sense that you understood King any better from using the theories, and that is the goal of applying the theories.  For example, you say King wanted to get away from his father when he first left Atlanta, but then later there he was back as his father’s assistant pastor.  Freud’s views about the father-son relationship would be very relevant to this, but the only Freudian interpretations you offer are:

1. Just pointing to there being ego which is balancing id and superego, without really explaining what the id forces might have been pushing King to do versus what the superego forces would push.

2. A statement about some decision being unconscious, without much explanation of why you make that claim.

Your application of the neo-analytic approach is also pretty vague.

I think you could make this paper stronger by going more deeply into the theories in explaining King’s life.  Also, the writing is awkward in places, and you could edit it to flow more smoothly.