Whether a Federal Court in a claim filed under Section 1983 can void a disbarment judgment of the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico in which the disbarred lawyer didn't had the opportunity to explain the judicial ethical complaints filed by him

QUESTION PRESENTED I filed a complaint in the Federal District Court of Puerto Rico in March 2019 19CV-1266 Leading case, and 19CV-1774. I wanted to obtain a declaratory judgment against the justices of the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico because I was disbarred without giving me the opportunity to defend myself. The Commissioner named by the Supreme Court refused to give the opportunity to explain the five ethical complaints and five recusal motions I filed against judges. There is the constitutional right to file ethical complaints and recusal motions against judges with specific facts, reasonable basis and with respect, see In Re Little, 404US533; Holt v. Virginia, 381US25; In Re Cardona Alvarez, 116DPR895. I filed the complaint under 42USC1983. There is no immunity for declaratory judgment and under the facts of this case for injunction remedy, see Heimbacke v. Lyons, 597F2d344; Allen v. Debello, 861F3d433; Clay v. Olstain, 210US District Court Lexis 111395; Khun v. Thompson, 304FedSupp2d1313; Tesmer v. Kowasky, 114FedSupp622; Monaham v. Savatis, 2014 US District Lexis 19840; Cain v. City of New Orleans, 184FedSup 3rd 379; Page v. Glady, 78FedSupp1207; : Snow v. King, 2018 US District Lexis 1613; Allee v. Medrano, 416US802; Sibly v. Lamb, 437F3d1077; Littleton v. Berbling, 468F3d389; Association of Medical Malpractice v. Torres Nieves, 2013 US District Lexis. Under the facts of this case there is no immunity for an injunction decree where no declaratory judgment can be obtained due to the bias of judges. See Owen v. Cowan, 2018 US District Lexis 2714; Chults v. Alabama, 2018 US District Lexis 228824. When there is a reasonable basis of bias of state justices and judges their judicial decisions and judgments can be voided under a declaratory (i) ll judgment or injunction remedy under Section 1983. Additionally when egregiously wrong decisions are made they are equivalent of a bias judgment and they can be voided, see In Re Honorable Diaz Garcia, 158DPR895; Davila v. Melendez, 2013JTS15; In Re Hammermaster, 985P2d924 (1999); In Re Benoit, 487A2d1158 (1975); In Re King, 5683NE2d588; The Line Between Legal Error and Judicial Misconduct: Balancing Judicial Independence and Accountability, Hofstra Law Review, Vol. 32 Issue 4 by Cynthia Grey. There was no due process in the hearing before the Commissioner named by the Supreme Court my disbarment and disqualification was void. It was a prior restraint, see Near v. Minnesota, 283US697; In Re Ruffalo, 395US544; Selling v. Radford, 243US46 (1917). No judge filed ethical complaint against me. ; They did not dared to do so after I filed a judicial complaints and recusal motion against judges, they . knew that my judicial ethical complaints and recusal_ . motions were constitutionally protected as before stated. Only an adversary lawyer filed an ethical complaint against me for the ethical complaints and recusal motions I filed against judges of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. He didn’t had legitimacy to do so, see Zachari v. Tribunal Superior, 104DPR267. The questions presented are: : 1. Whether a Federal Court in a claim filed under Section 1983 can void a disbarment judgment of the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico in which the disbarred lawyer didn’t had the opportunity to explain the judicial ethical complaints filed by him. Those judicial ethical complaints were specific with reasonable basis and respect. ili 2. Whether the complaint filed under Section 1983 private lawyers who conspire with judges to prepare judgments that were bias and egregiously wrong can be held responsible in damages. 3. Whether District Attorneys of the Solicitor General Division of the Department of Justice of Puerto Rico can be held responsible in damages in a complaint filed under Section 1983 when their investigative reports were prepared with bias. 4, Whether the Director of the Judicial Administration of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico which failed to supervise and punish the judges who prepared bias judgm