1. Whether supervisory intervention by this court is required where a district judge —structurally conflicted due to collegial involvement —assumed jurisdiction and issued orders in a case that directly implicates the constitutional validity of her own court, while the eleventh circuit, previously defied by the same district court, now lacks the institutional capacity to enforce its own mandate or provide appellate relief.

2. Whether supervisory intervention is required where a district court, already in structural conflict, repeatedly violates due process and disregards eleventh circuit mandates —first by ignoring a tolling order in a § 1983 case, and now by exercising jurisdiction in a related § 1985(3) action despite unresolved constitutional challenges.

3. Whether due process is violated when a district judge selectively rules on non-substantive motions —such as denying e-service and issuing standing orders —while ignoring threshold motions challenging venue and demanding disclosure, despite knowing her own judicial colleagues are named defendants.

4. Whether the combined effect of structural conflict, judicial defiance of appellate orders, and statutory privacy barriers to personal service creates a constitutional impasse that entitles a pro se litigant to u.s. marshal service and mandates supervisory intervention by this court

Whether supervisory intervention by the Supreme Court is required where a district judge with structural conflicts assumes jurisdiction in a case challenging the constitutional validity of her own court, despite Eleventh Circuit mandates