Is the Rooker-Feldman doctrine constitutional when it fails to protect individual rights under the Constitution and the purpose of the U.S. Supreme Court?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED : 7. “Is the Rooker-Feldman doctrine constitutional when it fails, "to protect individual rights under the Constitution...the purpose of the U.S. Supreme Court", according to Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. & Associate JUstice Anthony M. Kennedy? This case. 2. Is the Rooker-Feldman doctrice,in RE: above item #1, an "injustice against one individual" & if so than an "injustice against all individuals"? This case. 3. Is the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, in RE: above item #1, when it denys an individual, the right to a fair trial? This case. 4, Is the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, in RE: above item #1,applicbable ; when an attorney of record engages in blackmail, malpractice, breach of contract against well as engaging in perjury & obstruction of justice in a court of law? This case. : 5. Is the. Rooker-Feldman doctrine, in RE: above item #1, applicable when Plaintiff's witnesses engage in their testimony before a jury with pérjury & obstruction of justice statements which were aided & abetted by the Plaintiff's attorneys of record? This case. : . 6. Is the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, in RE: above item #1, applicable when a trial judge accepts hearsay evidence for a TRO & later at jury trial, this hearsay evidence allowed to poison the jury'&= decison’ against: the Défendant? This case. 7. %Is the Rodker-Feldman doctrine, in RE: above item #1, applicable when The Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act(Calif. Civil Code)basically: denys an individual's right to free speech by granting authority to”a*HOA's*Roard of.Directors to establigshh CC&Rs as governing documents that denys this "free speech"? This-case. 8. Is the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, in RE: above item #s 1&2, applicable when HOA's CC&Rs are invalid,being ambiquous & a defective election process in RE: elected Board member can be removed without reasen. This case. . 9. Is the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, in RE: above item #s 1&2, applicable when a Calif. Superior Court ruling against any rules that impede,a candidate for HOA's BOD, that candidate's name on the ballot without a nominating comte. endorsement or via petition? This case. 10. Is Rooker-Feldman doctrine, in RE above item #s 1&2, applicable when HOA'stattorneys of record engage in anti-Semitism, aided & abetted by HOA's General Manager? And; the hate-mongering HOA's BOD, et al, also engage-in.against an individual? This case. 11. Is Rooker-Feldman doctrine, in RE: above item #s 1&2, applicable when HOA's "hate-mongering" used to suppress existing defective conditions created by past & current BOD,& its dishonest legal & insurance representatives? This case. 12. Is Rooker-Feldman doctrine, in RE: above item #s 1&2, applicable when Calif. Attorney General given no authority to enforce The ~ Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act, & the local District attorney refuses to get involved in disputes within HOA's senior retirement communities? This case. 13. Is the Rooker-Peldman doctrine, in RE: above item #s 1&2, applicable when HOA's member of BOD violates CC&Rs & not enforced,a double standard? This case. 14. Is Rooker-Feldman doctrince,in RE: above item #s 1&2, applicable, when denying seniors in retirement communities a_federal law to protect them on a nationwide basis? This case.