First-Amendment-right,civil-rights,due-process,standing,civil-procedure,habeas-corpus

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED 1) has the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT (USDC) decision conflict with this aggrieved party's fundamental First Amendment Right? 2) has the NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS (COA) sanctioned, i.e. supported, the USDC's unjustifiable decisian? 3) did either the USDC or the COA "Resolve" any of the plainly pleaded "justiciable" (Article III.) "claim's" or allegation's? , 4) did the USDC & the COA sanction/support the STATE COURT'S Clerk's & Judge's willful misconduct & willful malice? 5) has the USDC & COA willfully departed from the accepted and , usual course of judicial proceeding's, i.e., the willful viclation of the for entertaining Corpus-~Action? 6) does-fany]-Federal Court "Lack.Jurisdiction" over a "matter" (brought to their attention in good-faith, by Affidavit; and declared under penalty of perjury) that plainly involves the willful depravation of fundamental, inalienable, rights by STATE "Had-Actor's," specifically, but not limited to this aggrieved . party's fundamental First Amendment Right To Redress? 7) has the USDC & COA violated, "Model Penal Code §2.96? 8) would jurists of reason conclude that the USDC or the CAA "Resolved" any of this aggrieved party's Art.III., "Claim!s"? 9) would jurists of reason conclude that this aggrieved party's Constitutional issue's are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further? 10) does this aggrieved party have a fundamental right to an "equitable remedy" in an Art.ITI., "Court of Equity"? 11) does the exception" apply in this aggrieved Habeas Corpus? 12) does this "supreme.Court," sic, i.e., an Article ITII., Court of Equity; as opposed to the SUPREME .COURT_OF .THE UNITED STATES, ; SIC, an "COURT" (28 U.S.C. §451); have to "Review" this eggrieved party's, State and Federal, "Original" Habeas 13) does this aggrieved party have a fundamental right ta "Equal Protection" of the Supreme, "Lau.of.the.Land? Question(s) Page 1 of 1