Whether a state can deprive a descendant of enslaved people the right to a jury trial

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW In the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Dred Scott v. John FA. Sandford (1857) 60 U.S. 393, 407, the Court held that descendants of imported Africans, cannot be, nor were ever intended to be, citizens under the U.S. Constitution; and the plaintiff, Dred Scott, was without standing to file a suit: , “__ In the opinion of the Court,.’they had for more than a century before been regarded as beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white man, either in social or political relations; and so far inferior, they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect; and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit. He was bought and sold and treated as an ordinary article of merchandise and traffic, whenever a profit could be made by it. This opinion was at that time fixed and universal in the civilized portion of the white race...’” Given the above-mentioned 19" century U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling and opinion in the Dred Scott case, the question presented to Chief Justice John Roberts and the associate justices of the U.S. Supreme Court is: “Whether a state [California] can deprive a descendant of enslaved people in the U.S. [who is also a Black Man born in California; and a decorated U.S. Army Veteran during the Vietnam-Era; and a senior citizen; and a father of both adult sons and adult daughters, and a grandfather of five; and a retired teacher in 22 California public high schools since 1977; and a California licensed lifetime college instructor of marketing and distribution since 1981; and a California certified nonprofit corporation president, overseer and senior pastor,] the right to a jury trial under the Seventh (7")_ Amendment to the U.S. Constitution?” : In other words, “Are Black Americans guaranteed identical rights under the Constitution of the United States of America as White Americans?”