Whether the de facto officer doctrine can be applied to individuals claiming to hold a vacant office of a political subdivision

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW The question presented for review, with its subsidiary questions is: Whether the de facto officer doctrine can be applied to individuals claiming to hold a vacant office of a political subdivision made vacant by the General Assembly statute declaring the office vacant, if an appointed officer does not take the mandatory oath to uphold the United States Constitution, where an injunction is sought by the vacant offices to prohibit the use and operation of a shooting range in violation of the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms? Subsidiary question 1 Whether the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to review the decisions of Indiana State courts that apply the de facto officer doctrine, where the individuals claiming to hold vacant offices violate a protected constitutional right?; Subsidiary question 2 Whether the failure to take an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States is a constitutional structural error, where the individuals claiming to hold vacant offices initiate a court action to prohibit the 2nd Amendment right of persons to use and operate a shooting range?; and Subsidiary question 3 Whether the de facto officer doctrine can be applied to individuals claiming to hold vacant offices, where the offices are vacant per Indiana law? (i)