Susan Spell v. Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services

Does a trial court violate the requirements of the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amend­ ment when it bases a permanent child custody or­ der on a racially discriminatory theory, holding that treatment that would be abusive if perpe­ trated against white children is not abusive, and even beneficial, when applied to black children? (See M.L.B. u. S.L.J, 519 U.S. 102, 117 S. Ct. 555, 136 L. Ed. 2d 473 (1996); Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745, 753, 102 S. Ct. 1388, 1394-95, 71 L. Ed. 2d 599 (1982); Nordlinger v. Hahn, 505 U.S. 1,112, S. Ct. 2326,120 L. Ed. 2d 1 (1992).)

Does a state appellate court violate the require­ ments of the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by wrongly denying a petition for a writ of error coram vobis, where newly available evidence demonstrates that a custody ruling was based on a racially discriminatory theory and was, in addition, procured through fraud and/or mis­ take? (See Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 43 S. Ct. 625, 67 L. Ed. 1042 (1923).)