Whether the state court decision is contrary to federal law based on the principle of an independent, fair, and competent judiciary

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED ; Sobhy Iskander, a state prisoner proceeding in forma pauperis vaag extraordinary circumstance moves this motion on a writ of certiorayi that a state court decision is contrary to federal law based on rs principle that an independent , fair, and competent judiciary ; t interpret and apply the laws that governs us. The role of the judiciary is central to americans concept of justice and the role of law |tatrionc to this code are the precepts that Judges individually an coltectivel , must respect and honor the judicial office as a public trust and strive to enhance and maintain confidence in our legal system. A sage is an arbiter of facts and law for the resolution of disputes andl a highly visible member of government under rules of law. | In performance of their duries as prescribed by law, they shall ; take precedence over all writ, brief, exhibits, letters, 2"¢. petitions ; surfnitted by the people, and they shall be faithful to the law regardLeds of partisan, public clamor, or fear of critism, and shall maintian prgfessional competence in the law. | Petitioner Sobhy Iskander has fifteen (15) cogent reasons which ard supported by facts and evidence on the Supplement Page (Reason for crfntin the Writ), and which strongly suggest that this court to give full consideration on constitutional claims which are debatable among jufiste of reason.Petitioner's brief demonstrate that actual term of cosa cannot be ministerally decided no matter what kind of twist the judiciary system invent to rule and regulations retroactive applied or conten overturn the violation of basic constitutional rights unreasonable application of united States Supreme Court's law by federal i i soul's decision was wrong. : | 8. V 7 . I, |