Whether a federal appellate court necessitates the exercise of the Supreme Court's supervisory power when it decides that a petitioner/appellant has not 'made a substantial showing of a constitutional right', despite the claims demonstrating clear proof of constitutional rights violations that are properly within the appellate and district courts' jurisdictions

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Because requisite exceptions are shown and have been met in the State and Federal . proceedings, regardless of styling said pleading-presented claims as §2241 or §2254, ; does a federal appellate court necessitate the exercise of this Court's supervisory power when, contrary to its own and this Court's precedent decisions, the appellate court decides that a has not "made a substantial showing of a : constitutional right", yet said claims. demonstrate proofs clearly adequate with grounds of constitutionally guaranteed rights having been violated to deserve a : ruling on their merits and the constitutional rights violations claims are both properly within the appellate court and district courts' jurisdictions? \ : (ii) 4 By