1. Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit exceed its enumerated powers and violate basic principles of federalism which seemed to have caused confusion regarding reconsideration of Petitioner Williams' case and ruled to dismiss it based on biasness or prejudice? See, Maddox v. State, 32 Ga. 587, 79 Am.Dec. 307; Pierson v. State, 18 Tex.App; Yarbrough v. Mallory, 225 Ala. 579, 144 So. 447, 448; and Evans vy. Superior Court in and for Los Angeles County, 107 Cal.App. 372, 290 P. 662, 665.

2. Was it not due to negligence, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1986 that the Respondents of STATE OF GEORGIA, in which they had power to prevent or aid in preventing such wrongful acts which makes them liable to the party who is the Petitioner that was injured, or Respondents legal representatives for all damages caused by such wrongful acts, by which such "persons" by reasonable diligence could have prevented; and such damages may be recovered in an action on the case; and any number of "persons" guilty of such wrongful neglect or refusal may be joined as defendants in this action? See Schneeweisz y. Illinois Cent. R. Co., 196 IllApp.248, 253; Schneider v. C. H, Little Co., 184 Mich. 315, 151 N.W. 587, 588; Hulley v. Moosbrugger, 88 N.J.L. 161,95 A. 1007, 1010, L.R.A. 1916C, 1203; and Krom v. Antigo Gas Co., 154 Wis. 528, 143 N.W. 163, 164

Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit exceed its enumerated powers and violate basic principles of federalism