Daniel Delacruz, Sr. v. State Bar of California, et al.

A disturbing trend in anti-Latino sentiment has emboldened the lower courts to eviscerate and extirpate the equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. Such disparate application of the law runs "the risk of undermining the public's confidence in the judicial process." Buck v. Davis, 137 S. Ct. 759, 778 (2017). The question presented is: 1. Does a dismissal of claims based on the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and First Amendment rights under the Noerr-Pennington doctrine violate the equal protection clauses under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and the Fourteenth Amendment where; a state court had ruled that a settlement contract involving racial discrimination against Latinos lawfully restrains First Amendment rights; where a state court ordered that Petitioner must pay a related debt that was lawfully discharged in bankruptcy court; where discovery documents were withheld and destroyed; and, where there was a felony conviction for conspiracy to commit bank fraud that targeted Latinos?