Did the Tenth Circuit err in disregarding the unanimous findings of the United States Supreme Court in regard to the provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 1514A?

Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution of the United States details that Judges, “shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour ”. Behavior is defined in the Code of Conduct for U.S. Judges, the Canons. Canon 2 and Canon 3, detail that “Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by irresponsible or improper conduct by judges. ”. The Constitution specifically and firmly states what rights Americans have, and in this case the First, Fourth, Seventh and Fourteenth provisions apply. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 protects whistleblowers who report financial wrongdoing at publicly traded companies. 18 U.S.C. § 1514A and specifically provides that employers may not “discharge, demote, suspend, threaten, harass, or in any other manner discriminate against an employee. ”, among other protections. The Questions Presented are: Did the Tenth Circuit err in disregarding the unanimous findings of the United States Supreme Court in regard to the provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 1514A? Whether a district court can enter an “order of dismissal as a sanction ” terminating constitutional rights of a Whistleblower employee. Whether the protective provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 1514A, i.e. burden-shifting, blame-shifting, applies to the employers ’ attorneys ’ and judges during the litigation. Whether orders are void ab initio when a judge on the case directly lies about the specific case to the United States Senate via their questionnaire for district judge application, defying the code of conduct and canons for United States Judges. Did the Wyoming district court err when they failed to act on an Injunctive Relief Motion that resulted in usurping Constitutional Rights from Petitioner?