Petitioners ' actions seeking enforcement of
federal rights and law were dismissed and denied
based upon demonstrable fraud by the district court
regarding Petitioners ' Complaints and Petition. The
essential determinations supporting dismissals and
denial were explicitly based upon factual assertions
purportedly derived solely from respective Petitioners '
pleadings, namely that Petitioners ' Complaint stated
that a Petitioner "argued " the perjury of one
Defendant-Respondent to another and that Habeas
Petitioner 's Petition for Habeas Corpus sought relief
from child-custody determinations. The face of the
records demonstrates that Petitioners ' Complaint(s)
provide no possible support for assertions of the
district court essential to dismissal and that Habeas
Petitioner 's Petition seeks relief only from
unconstitutionally imposed physical confinement,
necessitating that assertions otherwise are fully
fabricated by the district court. Petitioners appealed
and sought prohibition issuance at the Eighth Circuit,
which summarily affirmed the district court and
denied extraordinary relief, and sought certiorari here.

Should a writ of prohibition issue as a matter of
right to the Eighth Circuit against sustaining actions
that have no basis in any genuine case or controversy
before the Eighth Circuit or district court below for
failing to comply with U.S. Const. Art. Ill
requirements for federal judicial action?

Whether a writ of prohibition should issue as a matter of right against appellate court decisions lacking any basis in a genuine case or controversy and violating Article III requirements for federal judicial action