Is it constitutional for a court to dismiss a case seeking to restore constitutionally guaranteed religious freedom due to procedural issues with the defendant's representation?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED ! 1. Is it Constitutional, filed in the US District Court and for Jury case, for restoring the Right of Constitutionally Guaranteed Religious Freedom, in connection with its continuing and brutal Discrimination and Harassments violations, to be Denied/Dismissed with Prejudice from the Court Judge, ONLY, because in my a pro set, the people who tried to helped me as organize my defense and who have prepared and written all the documents for that, have tried to freely and out of any prejudice to defend me against false Declarations that were made in the Court from the Attorney of the Defendants . in the procedural dispute in Discover, and because of that, | to be deprived of the opportunity to restore my Constitutionally guaranteed right for Religious Freedom and | to be left to continue living in the future under these Religion Discrimination and Harassments? 2. 1s it Constitutional, filed in the US District Court and for a Jury Cases, for restoring the Right of Constitutionally Guaranteed Religious Freedom and removal of financial Sanctions in connection with its : continuing and brutal Discrimination and Harassments violations, to be Denied/Dismissed with Prejudice from the Court ALL these 3 cases, 1 Since ONLY and ONLY for ONE of these cases, regarding the procedural dispute in Discover, was done a decision for Denied/Dismissed with Prejudice? And because of that, | to be deprived of the opportunity for the other 2 cases to restore my Constitutionally guaranteed right for Religious Freedom and removal of financial Sanctions in connection with its continuing and brutal Discrimination and Harassments violations, and | to be left to continue living in the future under these Religion Discrimination and Harassments and financial Sanctions in connection with its continuing and brutal Discrimination and Harassments violations? 3. Is it Constitutional, filed in the US District Court and for a Jury Cases for restoring the Right of Constitutionally Guaranteed Religious Freedom and removal of financial Sanctions in connection with its continuing and brutal Discrimination and Harassments violations, to be Denied my Motions by which | asked the Court to appoint me an Attorney who to take my defense in this my Cases, After | am poor, do not have any financial possibility to hire an Attorney, who to may take my defense, | have no spoken or written English and | cannot prepare and write any document and defend myself, | : and since | also have a serious medical and mental problems, | do not have any possibility to defend myself in these cases. And because of that, | to be deprived of the opportunity to have Court protection and to be deprived of my right of fair Court trial, and to not be removed these continuing and brutal Discrimination and Harassments violations and financial Sanctions, and | to be left to continue living in the future under these Religion Discrimination and Harassments and financial Sanctions from them? 4. \s it Constitutional, filed in the US District Court and for a Jury Cases, for restoring the Right of Constitutionally Guaranteed Religious Freedom and for removal of financial Sanctions in connection with its continuing and brutal Discrimination and Harassments violations, and financial Sanctions from it the Court to deny my Motions and Objections totally without any consideration and discussion on any , of them, as well as to Deny my Motions for giving me enough time to may do my Objections on the Judges recommendations. And because of that, | to be deprived of the possibility to defend myself in this Cases and to be deprived of my right of fair Court trial, and because of that not to be removed these continuing and brutal Discrimination and Harassments violations and financial Sanctions, and thus | to be left to continue living in the future under these Religion Discrimination and Harassments and financial Sanctions from them? iH] 1. Aren’t these decisions for "DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE", from 09