Whether the U.S. 5th Cir. Court of Appeals has so far departure from the accepted and usual course of judicial proceeding

QUESTION PRESENTED Whether the U.S. 5" Cir. Court of Appeals has so far departure from the accepted and usial course of judicial proceeding in light of, Williams y. Taplar, 120 S.Ct. 1495, 529 ULS. 362 (2000) (citing Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177 (1803); Teague v. Lane, 489 US. 288, 109 S.Ct. 1060 (1989)), and sanction such an departure by the U.S. District Court (E.D.(La)), as ta call for an exercise of this Caurt’s supervisory power, which the judicial power under section 2 of article 3 of the Constitution shall extend to a case in Jaw and equity, ansing under the Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority, to controversies which the United States shall be a party. Afaskrat v. US., 31 S.Ct. 250, 219 U.S. 346 (1911)(citing Hayburn’s Case, 2 Dall. 409 (1792), US.y. Ferreira 13 How. 40 (1851), Gordon v. United States 117 U.S. 694 (1864), Boltimore & ORCa v Interstate Commerce Commission, 215 U.S. 216, 80 S.Ct. Rep 86 (1909); Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 Dall 432 (1793), Osborn vy. Bank of United States, 9 Wheat. 819 (1824), Cohens v. Comm onwedlth of Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264, 387, 5 L.Ed. 257 (1821), Chicago & GT-R. Co, v. Wellman, 143 U.S. 339, 12 S.Ct. Rep. 400 (1982). . i ang