Questions without prejudice I need your help to comprehend:

1. Does a court treated by Congress of the United States not obligated to prove it's a court on Aid stabs to proceeding any further? Proof of personal and subject matter jurisdiction as well as lawful proof of service, prior American Indian Tribal lawful counsel - it does the law not require the District of Court to allow an American Indian when presented with rites governing downturn, pen court by prosecuting me as a 'beach citizen', and using this label to call right to set identity call e m ion and Tribal Judicial Findings me a Sovereign citizen [which does not exist]?

2. Has the District Court authorized to proceed without the Consent of the accused?

3. Does the law not require the states find the courts to honor and protect the rights, treaties, and status of the indigenous peoples, and their tribe?

4. Does not the law require the District Court, Courts to honor tribal Judicial hearing judgments in matter involving tribal national members?

5. Does not the law require the District court to honor the jurisdiction of Indian tribes?

6. Does not the law and treaties require an American Indian be tried by his tribe, and if the Constitution to the legal Society as codes or statutes then by a jury of his peers?

7. Can a Court Convert a nonalienable right into a crime, and can it even offer admitting that the alleged crime is a right?

8. Did not the Court not force this American Indian do be obligated to the legal Society, negating the treaties, national law and, Congressional demands?

9. I respectfully require this honorable Court to review this matter to determine whether the lower courts acted lawfully in viewing jurisdiction over this American Indians body, and subject matter jurisdiction having lawful authority to have reached a determination in the matter without proving the strict elements of jurisprudence.

Whether the District Court was obligated to prove its jurisdiction and proper service before proceeding, whether the court was required to allow the defendant tribal counsel, whether the court properly acknowledged the defendant's tribal status, whether the non-Article III court had authority to proceed without consent, whether the court was required to honor tribal rights and judgments, whether the court was required to honor the defendant's tribal jurisdiction