Can States Statues Judges or Attorneys violate that State's Constitution, the Federal Constitution and Federal laws, pertaining to conflict-of-interest

Questions Presented Can States Statues Judges or Attorneys violate that State’s Constitution , the Federal Constitution and Federal laws, pertaining to conflict of interest. Where the duo, [t] he now Presiding Judge and Counsel his longtime Friendship violates the rules of oath of office 28 U.S.C. 453 (a) 28 U.S.C. 455 as Sworn to uphold the constitution and laws of the United States of America . Where recusal for disqualification on fraud and irreparable Harm existed . Where Petitioner requested the Judge to recuse himself for lack of impartiality from the case for not following the consistency for wrong doing, based on _ fundamental constitutional rights to due process of law. Where the Judge ruled out of Jurisdiction on consolidated appealed issues, by not Following the Fourth District Court of Appeals order dated the 5" of November 2018 , was it unconstitutional, miscarriage of justice , bias and Judicial misconduct. Should the judge refuse to stay or give hearing dates to Petitioner’s Motions, additionally. instructing his judicial assistant not to give hearing dates to Petitioner’s motions. Where Counsel was required by rules and instructed by the previous judge to . respond to the Amended Complaint and did not, neither seek an enlargement of time , prior to Petitioner’s application for default was filed. Jurisdiction This Court has jurisdiction to review cases on constitutional matters as pursuant to 28 U.S. Code section 1254 (1) Acknowledged by the “Not Authorized” orders of . . Both Courts when appealed to The Fourth District Court of Appeals and the Florida Supreme Court of Appeals ; , Constitutional provisions involved Petitioner movant in the above captioned cause and with having Honorable ‘respect therefore acceding to this Court Jurisdiction 28 U.S.C, 1254 section ; (1) Provides that “[c]ases in the courts.of appeals maybe reviewed by the supreme Court... [b]y writ of certiorari granted upon the petition of any party to any civil or Criminal case”... inpart. Drastic and extraordinary remedies Pursuant to Rule 20. hereby gives notice pursuant to, Rule 20.1, 28 U.S C. Section 2101 (c) 28 U.S.C. 1651 (a) for discretionary review as outlined under the surrounding ; | ‘Exceptional Warranted circumstances. Statement of Case The Florida Supreme Court order dated June 23 rd 2020 , was unauthorized as claimed , “Not Authorized” notwithstanding the lack of jurisdiction, in the appellate Courts. lpaee . Lo. Se pete ene eee Inasmuch verified, evidently justifying constitutional matters as contained and acknowledged by the Courts not having the judicial authorized powers consistently expressed throughout decisional orders outlined in the Appeals Courts. The 4DCA order dated 10/31/19 “Not Authorized”. | The Florida Supreme Court order Dated 06/16/20 “Not Authorized”. Only this Court has the Judicial powers on constitutional Authority review matters. Factual History findings The Oath of Judges became Villainous and subvert by Counsel’s friendship “Judicial Misconduct” knowingly, the Oath of duty to upheld their oath of duties were unconstitutional switched ; which violated Petitioner’s rights. | Counsel’s friendship with the judge submitted for review before the court by Petitioner on irregularities, fraudulent illegalities ,developed into fear as guided by the actions of “bias and prejudice” conducted by the duo after, in removing the first Judge did caused irreparable harm . Petitioner filed a motion to disqualify the judge for errors and lack of due process. Petitioner appealed the case to the Fourth District Court of Appeals, which the Court was not authorized to conclude constitutional matters, said was not entertained; subsequently, by a not authorized order, taking several months was’ followed by a P.C.A_ decision in light of all the years under appealed in the appellate Court . : Which said court fundamentally failed to enforce its own orders on irreparable harm directed to respondent Counsel. The Fourth District Cour