Does the Rooker-Feldman doctrine foreclose a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action in federal court against individual influencers of a state's attorney licensing process?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Does the Rooker-Feldman doctrine foreclose a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action in federal court against individual influencers of a state’s attorney licensing process when the individual : influencers actions negatively affect application and/or create a prerequisite to eligibility for licensure outside : of any published Rule for admission? Does the state Supreme Court’s judicial and administrative affirmation of the actions, findings and decisions of these unauthorized individual influencers mean that the fines and findings of such third-party unsanctioned and unlawful independent processes are inextricably intertwined with the state court sua sponte order imposing a fine years later, as the district court held in this . matter; or does inextricably intertwined not protect such third party influencers as the 11th Circuit determined in Behr v. Campbell, 8 F.4th 1206 (11th Cir. 2021); and as the 8th Circuit determined in Carter v. Ludwick, (8th Cir. 2021). 2. Is it an impermissible delegation of authority from a state Supreme Court to a bar association, as this Court held in D.C. Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462 (1983), when the chief licensing authority — in a state requires a potential bar applicant to —— ‘reimburse’ a bar fund in order to establish future eligibility to submit an application to practice law, even though the applicant is otherwise eligible to submit an application under the relevant promulgated state Rules for licensure, the applicant has never been found to have violated any rule of conduct related to any such bar fund proceeding, and the bar fund has not properly , been granted any state or constitutional authority to investigate attorney misconduct? Does Ex Parte Young, i 209 U.S. 123 (1908) allow the potential applicant to the bar to bring a federal declaratory relief action against the state’s chief licensure and rule-making authority to determine the constitutionality of these rule provisions presented for review, as well as to determine the constitutionality of numerous unwritten state licensure practices prior to submitting additional requests for admission; or is declaratory relief foreclosed because the question regards the practice of law instead of any other licensed profession?