Whether fair-minded jurists could disagree with a reviewing court's decision to ignore a claim of actual innocence

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Whether fair-minded jurists could disagree with a reviewing courts decision to ignore a claim of actual innocence, not presented for review in prisoner’s direct appeal nor first habeas petition, despite prisoners overwhelming showing of actual innocence. Where the “due process of law” clause of the U.S. Constitution, Amendment XIV, regarding the State’s , obligation to follow the United States Constitution including the Due Process Clause is being deprived by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and actual innocence is completely being overlooked which deprives Petitioner of being allowed to prove Factual Innocence to his State charge and Conviction. Where case law precedent in this very Court contradicts the Ninth Circuit of Appeal’s opinion and , decision on Xx xx, 2021 that the Supreme Court’s job is to keep in uniformity with other top Appeals | Courts decisions and State Supreme Court decisions under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. } Constitution? Where the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals had failed to recognize the U.S. Constitution’s miscarriage of justice exception for a habeas corpus procedural defect and that an actual innocence claim leading toward a wrongful conviction in a state court should be an exception to such procedural defect? :