Given that the first fourth and fourteenth RELIGIOUS guaranties are the law stated with specificity in Constitutional and legal RIGHTS that are respected by ALL States as a matter of American law and as a legal requirement of and in Constitutional American law to be accepted and acknowledged does not a name changed by COURT ORDER satisfy the LEGAL definition as a PRODUCT of protected RELIGIOUS EXPRESSION Christian identity and are absolutely PROTECTED as a matter of law regardless of race or Delaware institutional racism and carry both legal weight and United States Constitutional respect and authority as the LAW OF THE LAND that would be in contrast and in comparison to be automatically be afforded affirmatively applied given by the State of Delaware to a Caucasian convicted career criminal like FRED MAAHS receives or that of affirmation of HANDLON or WITHAM by the State who routinely receives and are given preference automatically by the State as a result of unlawful outlawed prohibited Caucasian privilege promotion illegally by the State Court system institutionally and as identified and documented as material evidence of the claims made in the contemporaneous record of proceedings regarding the intentional mispelling that was perpetrated twice criminally and antecedently in the superior court by both DOJ HANDLON and subsequently by Witham and subsequently thereafter by several others referenced ALL persons noted were absolutely acting in deliberate criminal misconduct in violation of an active CHRISTIAN NAME change COURT ORDER as an acts of deliberate racially motivated criminal obstruction of the right of protected Christian Religious expression that were done as intentional reprisal retribution and in the subsequent WITHAM example done with premeditated malice aforethought in retribution retaliation and reprisal without appropriate legal consequences when victim are Blacks and perpetrator are white?

IS not right to Religious expression legally settled and established as CONSTITUTIONALLY protected as a matter of law in any State and in every State, and of such importance and significance to be recognized by the State Supreme Court, regardless of race or racism at issue. Violation of 8 USC 241 and 242 and violation of 42 USC 1981 and 1983 and 1985 and 198 1986 provision applications, and operations and of a criminal violation of antecedent COURT ORDER NAME CHANGED as a LEGAL matter. Race is at issue in terms of Constitutionally protected Religious expression applications that are protected legal and civil rights in American law that are legal rights that are protected by Constitutional law and is that legally protected status standing and legal capacity are protected by federal law. That required the due process acknowledgment of CIVIL and CONSTITUTIONAL rights that no competent judge would not recognize as legally protected and as also violations of a court order additionally as these three racist incompetent Delaware Supreme Court judges failed to consider and obstructed due process. Whereas such institutionally racist actions identified by Petitioner on the contemporaneous record of proceedings are in significant meaningful violations of the antecedent NAME CHANGE court order violation by the State court due to race and to racism illegally voided due process by the State Court Unconstitutional obstructing of the protected Civil and Constitutional and LEGAL RIGHT to the freedom of Religious expression?

Are not the referenced contemporaneously documented factual circumstances significant violation of law in particular to the United States code and of federal law that this WRIT of CERTIORARI raising important issues of significant oppression and meaningful obstruction by the Delaware judicial system are in terms in consideration of misconduct of both Delaware Supreme and Superior courts be granted and this PETITION be heard by the Supreme Court of the United States?

The factual existence of systemic institutional racism

Given that the first fourth and fourteenth RELIGIOUS guaranties are the law stated with specificity in Constitutional and legal RIGHTS that are respected by ALL States as a matter of American law and as a legal requirement of and in Constitutional American law to be accepted and acknowledged does not a name changed by COURT ORDER satisfy the LEGAL definition as a PRODUCT of protected RELIGIOUS EXPRESSION Christian identity and are absolutely PROTECTED as a matter of law regardless of race or Delaware institutional racism and carry both legal weight and United States Constitutional respect and authority as the LAW OF THE LAND that would be in contrast and in comparison to be automatically be afforded affirmatively applied given by the State of Delaware to a Caucasian convicted career criminal like FRED MAAHS receives or that of affirmation of HANDLON or WITHAM by the State who routinely receives and are given preference automatically by the State as a result of unlawful outlawed prohibited Caucasian privilege promotion illegally by the State Court system institutionally and as identified and documented as material evidence of the claims made in the contemporaneous record of proceedings regarding the intentional mispelling that was perpetrated twice criminally and antecedently in the superior court by both DOJ HANDLON and subsequently by Witham and subsequently thereafter by several others referenced ALL persons noted were absolutely acting in deliberate criminal misconduct in violation of an active CHRISTIAN NAME change COURT ORDER as an acts of deliberate racially motivated criminal obstruction of the right of protected Christian Religious expression