Can a judge ignore a party's challenge to his impartiality, maintain jurisdiction and abuse his adjudicative authority to extort the challenging party?

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW "The constitution, indeed law in general, applies to those who are not popular just as it applies to those who are popular". Uziel v Superior Court alleges discrimination against a self represented Plaintiff, obstruction of justice and legal extortion? by a judge and six attorneys. Defendants? moved to dismiss Uziel v Superior Court as a matter of law. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held‘ that the District Court "did not abuse its discretion by denying Uziel' motions to recuse both magistrate and district court judges", affirmed the District Court Judgment, denied rehearing and rehearing en banc. . The question presented is: : Can a judge ignore a party’ challenge to his impartiality, maintain jurisdiction and abuse his adjudicative authority to extort the challenging party as the Ninth Circuit held? Or: Does the Ninth Circuit' decision establishes a precedent that legitimizes: Gi) discrimination against a self represented litigant, and: Gi) Extortion from that litigant? + Justice Stephen Breyer in the 2021 Scalia Lecture at Harvard Law school published in "THE Authority of the Court and the Peril of Politics [Harvard Press 2021 ISBN 9780674269361, Identifier: LCCN 2021017885] 2 "Legal Extortion" is a violation of 18 U.S. Code §872 committed by officers of the Court by utilizing the US judiciary and their judicial privileges to intimidate and extort money from their victims. 3 Defendants include a sitting LASC judge, five attorneys and three legal corporations acting in support of the alleged criminal conduct of Defendants. 4