Whether the U.S. Constitution permits federal courts to discipline an attorney for challenging judicial misconduct without providing specific standards of conduct or identifying material facts supporting alleged violations

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether the U.S. Constitution delegated power to . federal courts to injure a court officer (an attorney) because he stated in written federal court filings (e.9., ; motions to reconsider or recuse or appellate briefing) : that other court officers (federal judges) knowingly misrepresented evidence reviewed in camera, . knowingly violated rights and freedoms expressly secured by the U.S. Constitution and federal laws and committed federal offenses (e.g., in 18 U.S.C. : 241, 242, 371, 1001, 1341, 1343, 1349 or 1519) when : no fact ever was stated or proved to show how any . such attorney statement was false or misleading ; or otherwise adversely affected any proceeding or exceeded the scope of speech and petitioning secured by the First, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution and copious U.S. Supreme Court precedent thereunder. 2. When an attorney challenges reciprocal disbarment, whether the U.S. Constitution delegated power to federal courts to disbar the attorney (2.e., deprive the attorney of his liberty to practice and property interest in practicing his profession in such courts) for purported misconduct without such federal court expressly identifying the particular governing standard(s) of conduct, identifying the attorney — conduct that purportedly violated any such standard, identifying the facts material to proving how any such attorney conduct violated any such standard, and identifying the evidence that was admissible and admitted to prove all material facts. ; ub . DIRECTLY