Are U.S. courts operating under the U.S. Constitution or the UN's International Association of Judges?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1. Are U.S. Courts and the SUPREME COURT really operating as “ARTICLE III” under the U.S. CONSTITUTION, or are they operating under the CONSTITUTION of the UNITED NATIONS’ “INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF JUDGES” through unified FEDERAL JUDGES ASSOCIATION membership to the IAJ via UNITED STATES judges’ membership in the FJA? Either way, can U.S. judges continue to treat repeated "erime victim" Reports about an "attempted murder’, and “whistleblowe1" Statements about criminal coverups by "government servants' of the EXECUTIVE and JUDICIAL branches in cases, "with blanket immunity’ for “the Accused’ and “without providing any meaningful investigation whatsoeve1" into any of the CIVIL claims and CRIMINAL allegations? If so, how is this so, when both JUDICIAL and EXECUTIVE officers have OATHS OF RESPONSIBILY and FIDUCIARY DUTIES, and are being paid by American “Taxpayers” to act. with accountability ue to address FACTS, EVIDENCE, and CLAIMS against their failures to act constitutionally and in accordance with the Public Trust? 2. Notwithstanding Affidavit(s) of Truth concerning the FACTS, EVIDENCE and CLAIMS of #1 above, is not a proclaimed “Tong time target’ of government retaliation and an attempted murder resulting in amputations of both legs and all but a single pinky finger on a non-dominant hand — being one who continues to be targeted to such extent as to being thereafter criminally EVICTED WITHOUT DUE PROCESS during the deathly cold of a Michigan winter, during a COVID ii PANDEMIC, and during an EVICTION MORATORIUM entitled to proper "access" to the UNITED STATES courts after finding refuge from homelessness as a bona fide "REFUGEE," and once settled in another State? If not, why not given the conditions of #1 above concerning OATHS and DUTIES? 3. Notwithstanding a plethora of Affidavit(s) of Truth(s) concerning the FACTS, EVIDENCE and CLAIMS of both #1 and #2 above, is not Certiorari warranted when UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT "judgels/' assigned to the case(s) have written a prima facie fraudulent "judgment/s}' and other convoluted and erroneous documents that not only DISMISSES the entire case(s), but also goes so far as to summarily deny a "forma pauperis’ and "recently totally and permanently disabled quad-amputee" any "access" whatsoever to the “#lectronic [EM/ECE] Filing System’, and similarly denying all requested formal “Service of Process’ by the U.S. MARSHALS SERVICE upon the named to the captioned case(s); and thus, COMPLETELY DENIES ACCESS to a sovereign America man deemed otherwise protected from such disparaging and unequal treatment under the U.S. CONSTITUTION, Human Rights Laws, and Civil Rights Laws designed to protect and.provide “eqgua/ treatment’ to the disabled’, the "poor", and the "elderly’, as BENEFICIARY David Schied is one of the Sovereign American People and as a former “Taxpaye? If not, why not when JUDICIAL officers have OATHS OF RESPONSIBILY and FIDUCIARY DUTIES to act with accountability while providing due process and court access in accordance with the Public Trust? iii 4. Notwithstanding EVIDENCE of all three numbered " 7ruths' listed above, is not Certiorari warranted when a TRIBUNAL of UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS (8th Cir.) "judges" has summarily upheld the lower District Court's fraudulence with only two sentences of unexplained concurrence in dismissing the case without due process, without providing the "whistleblower" against government and alleged criminal perpetrators with "meaningful access", and without the named being provided their day in Court to defend the civil CLAIMS and formal CRIMINAL ALLEGATIONS against them as otherwise required by law governing "speedy trials"? If not, why not when ... (as stated above)? iv REVISED