Did the Supreme Court err in holding that the federal courts have the right and the duty to protect themselves from fraud, misrepresentation and misconduct, and is that dependent on the actions of the parties seeking redress for fraud?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Did aot Supreme Court chanCy rot the Ledecel Courts have. the eight ana she doch, Sn, Protect Aself Crore Raud miscepresembation ancl misconduct and +e eight a wrong, and is aot dependen* ourhe actions of the parkies +o ceeks cedress Lor Craud. Crike Olotaining coAy hould wok -Khe main Concern of the Supreme. Court be the true administration of suskee anak to establish a fair Fedecal Rule of Civil Procedure, Rule GOCbIC3) Appel Late. | review Proceduce to protect Me adequacy \ inkegeity \ Sareness of the LPedecal Judicial process against agents ; oF shake. olstaining LavoroleLe Tudgemects iw habeas | proceedings lou sophish caked mode of Aiscaminatocy ; iFraud, mistepresentalion and miscouduct used +o specifically man pulate the Vedecal coucks' ceview process denying U.S. CA ZENS who ace Poor, uneducated Or mentally Aisabled, tadigent, PFO Se, & due process meaningful oppoctunity +e be heard anol ee \pe. alee | . denied Appellate Revigus \ey disceminato mH loactie of reguicing CoA What i< mpossilsle. +o olbkain in Light of oe ing \oLockeel oy The Nery Fraud evidenced NA motions JA FEQUITAG a Perdioner +o ex O CorkSicate of Apeealalility CCoA) -o Appeal dental of Ale GO CSC nok clso o constithonally ungale Appeal double standard Wecause had the state ag opposing party Kled oa Rule GO Co>C3) motion or the. Aishick couck Qranted Siskos' Rule GO CLdC2d motion , e Stole could Wave appealed tyre Coutks decision ; without obtaining a COA. , L