Whether the state district-court judge violated the Fourteenth Amendment's privileges and immunities clause as well as the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments' due process guarantee

QUESTIONS PRESENTED I. WHETHER THE STATE DISTRICT-COURT JUDGE VIOLATED THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT’S PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES CLAUSE AS WELL AS THE FIFTH AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS’ DUE PROCESS GUARANTEE THAT A CAUSE SHALL BE HEARD BY A FAIR AND IMPARTIAL TRIBUNAL VIA THE JUDGE ACTING IN A MANNER TANTAMOUNT TO PARTISAN ADVOCACY? IJ. WHETHER THE STATE OF IOWA VIOLATED THE UNITED STATES FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT WHEN THE IOWA COURT OF APPEALS REFUSED TO APPLY CLEARLY ESTABLISHED AND WELL-SETTLED LEGAL PRINCIPLES OF STATE LAW TO THE FACTS OF THE INSTANT MATTER IN ORDER TO CONVERT A NONJURISDICTIONAL CLAIM PROCESSING RULE INTO A RULE WITH JURISDICTIONAL CONSEQUENCES? _ III. WHETHER THIS COURT’S DECISIONS DEFINING THE LEGAL TERM “SUBJECT-MATTER JURISDICTION” — AND THE CORRESPONDING AUBURN BRIGHT LINE _ TEST CONCERNING NONJURISDICTIONAL STATUTORY TIME LIMITS AND CLAIMS PROCESSING RULES — ARE ENFORCEABLE UPON THE STATES VIA THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION’S SUPREMACY CLAUSE, FULL FAITH AND CREDIT CLAUSE, PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES CLAUSE, THE SIXTH AMENDMENT, AND THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT’S PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES, EQUAL PROTECTION, AND DUE PROCESS PROVISIONS? u