Whether the use of legislative history as law, despite this Court's precedents that it is not law, is a separation of powers offense

QUESTIONS PRESENTED . 1. This court determined many times throughout history, legislative history is not law, and it is wrong to use legislative history as law and as a means to interpret statutes that are ambiguous because it is returning to the political legislative dimension of the statute where federal courts do not have jurisdiction or authority to assume legislative powers, so if a court'uses legislative history as law, as a presumption of law, and that presumption of law was debunked, and the court continued to use legislative history as law, would it be a separation of powers offense? . 2. For 18 U.S.C. § 119 to apply, it has a requirement, the alleged victim must be engaged in or on account of the performance of official duties. If that alleged victim was a federal judge that used legislative history as law, a potential separation of powers offense, would that federal judge be engaged in or on account of the performance of official duties for 18 U.S.C. § 119 to apply? ‘3... Whether there are reversible structural errors, the lower courts ’ letting the separation of powers offense slide and keeping an innocent person criminalized, that needs this Court’s review. | : Page 2 of 32 CONTENTS Il. PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI sac