Does the U.S. Supreme Court view habeas-corpus as a static-narrow-formalistic remedy or has its scope grown to achieve its grand purpose the protection of individuals against erosion of their Right to be free from wrongful restraints upon their liberty

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED t '1.) An important Question in the Administration of Justice, which has the potential to effect a large number of american citizens, is: "Does the U.S. Supreme Court view [i]t [habeas corpus] as a static, narrow, formalistic remedy; or has its scope grown , to achieve its grand purpose the protection of individurals against erosion of their Right to be free from wrongful restraints upon their liberty? and if so, on what boundry is such 'restraints and liberty’ defined?" 2.) Is there any evidence within the lower U.S. District Court's conclusion to Conner's §2254 that suggest an apparent abuse of discretion which prevented Conner from receiving a fairunbiased judgment? 3.) This next Question is an exact duplicate to what was the sole basis of Conner's State & Federal Habeas Corpus Pleadings; neither court ever gave answer to this crucial Constitutional Claim (verbatim): "After assessing all the Facts and supporting , evidence in correlation to precedent and the many statutory LAWS which govern the issue [in this Court's opinion] was Conner's Pe! tition for Discretionary Review timely delivered; Yes or No?" | 4.) Was the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals' decision to deny Conner a COA in keeping with 28 U.S.C. §2254(c)(2) and the many binding precedents established by this Supreme Court of the United States? ii