Right to challenge detention

1. Is Petitioner in custody in violation of the Constitution and laws of the United States due to judicial misconduct during the execution of his sentence — specifically, a violation of the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection of Laws — when the judges involved in the direct appeal, § 2255 motion, and certificate of appealability proceedings engaged in a course of conduct that denied Petitioner the fair and due administration of justice, rendering the § 2255 remedy by motion inadequate and ineffective to test the legalityof his detention; and would Petitioner have prevailed under his consolidated ineffective assistance of counsel claims but for that misconduct? 2. Where judicial misconduct during the execution of sentence has rendered the § 2255 remedy inadequate and ineffective — because the courts treating a new independent civil suit as a continuation of the criminal case adopted a manufactured appellate fact rather than making independent findings from the trial record — and no lower court within the circuit that produced the error can provide untainted review, does the failure to grant the writ of habeas corpus operate as a suspension of the writ in violation of Article I, Section 9, Clause 2 of the Constitution, and deny Petitioner the one fair opportunity to present his federal claims that Congress guaranteed in enacting the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act?