How can the tenth circuit have a ruling on the same subject matter as the Supreme Court & other circuits courts & has a ruling that is in conflict with the Original Constitution of (1791), The Superme Court and others circuits?

No question identified. : TRULINCS 15819064 HAMMONS, BRITT JARRIEL Unit: HAZ-D-B FROM: 15819064 : . TO SUBJECT: PRESENTED QUESTION(S) ; DATE: 04/22/2024 10:21:30 AM . PRESENTED QUESTION 1 ‘How can the tenth circuit have a ruling on the same subject matter as the Supreme Court & other circuits courts & has a ruling that is in conflict with the Original Constitution of (1791), The Superme Court and others circuits ? . PRESENTED QUESTION 2 Why is the tenth circuit committing treason against the original constitution by ruling that the federal status 922(g)(1) is constitutional? When most of the circuit has said that the fedral status 922(g)(1) is unconstitutional. The very honaorable Judge Reeves (who is also the chair of the sentencing commission) has stated in open court "That the 922 (g)(1) is unconstitutional because it does not pass Bruen . See Bullock v. United States 3:18 c. 165 muster.. The Supreme Ct. has also stated that the second and fourteenth amendments protect an individuals right to keep and or bear arms for self-defense. In so doing we held unconstitutional two laws that prohibited the possession and use of handguns in the home ..see Heller and McDonald. Justice Amy Comey Barret stated this: "History is consistent with common sense; it demostrates that legislatures have the power to prohibit dangerous people from possessing guns. But that power extends only to people who are dangerous. Founding-era legislatures did not strip felons of the right te bear arms simply because of their status of felons.. See Kanter v. Barr 919f.3d 437 (7 ci 2019) ; . . PRESENTED QUESTION 3 . .How can a district judge and/ or circuit judge go against the original constitution of the united states? When its the Supreme Law of the land. When it states clearly in the second amendment a well regualted militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed upon. Furthermore the fourteenth amendment held that no state shall make or enforce any law whcih shall abridge the privileges or immunites of citizens of the United States nor shall any state deprive and person of life liberty and or the pursuit of happiness. The Supreme Ct. decided in 2008 that the individuals right was more faithful to the constitution " There seems to us no doubt, o the basis of both text and history , That the second amendment conferred an individuals right to keep and or bear arms" {See. DC v. Heller,554 U.S.570,595, 168 S. Ct 2783 171 L.Ed 2d 637 (2008)} a The 7th Circuit Judge Barret has stated " Nor have the parties introducedand historic evidence that the founding-era legislatures imposed virtue-based restrictions on the right? Such restrictions applied to civic right like vote and jury service, not to individual rights like the right to possess a firearm. (See Kanter v. Barr 919 F3d 437) : , (1) TRULINCS 15819064 HAMMONS, BRITT JARRIEL Unit: HAZ-D-B FROM: 15819064 SUBJECT: