Whether a sitting U.S. District Court Judge and government prosecutors violated the Petitioners' due process rights and First Amendment protections through conflicting judicial doctrines

QUESTIONS PRESENTED A serious conflict exists between decisions rendered from this Court and lower appeal courts, along with constitutional provisions and statutes, in deciding whether or not the trial court or the circuit court has jurisdiction to try the merits of this case. This case involves a sitting United States District Court Judge and certain government prosecutors whose acts and actions show a failure of faithful allegiance to the law and process have violated and continue to violate Petitioners protected due process right for a redress of grievances by and through the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America and in violation of their respective Oaths of Office. Furthermore, there are two doctrines that conflict with each other found in this case affecting every court in this country. These doctrines are known as the doctrine of equitable maxim and the doctrine of the object principle of justice. Equitable maxim created by this court, which the lower court used to dismiss this case, sits in direct violation of the object principle of justice also partially created by this Court and supported by other appeal courts and constitutional provisions. These conflicts call for the supervisory power of this Court to resolve these conflicts, which has not, but should be, settled by this Court without delay.