Whether the State Courts have the inherent power or jurisdiction to allow a white couple, or any person, to proceed in court to gain custody of a child

QUESTIONS PRESENTED : Appellants seek review of the jurisdiction of the State Court and a judgment of the Supreme Court of the State of Washington denying Appellants’ petition of review of the Washington Court of Appeals’ denial of Appellants’ right to due process, including the right to a hearing, to decisions based on the records, and to : a statement of the reasons of its decisions. These violations occurred when the Court of Appeals did not review Appellants’ assigned errors in the trial court’s ' decisions after the Court of Appeals had lost its records of the trial court’s decisions and the established facts of the case prior to the issue of its opinion; and when the Court of Appeals rested its decision on without said lost records. The Questions Presented Are: 1. Whether the State Courts have the inherent power or jurisdiction to allow a white couple, or any person, to proceed in court to gain custody of a child when the trial court already decreed that they were not the parents nor the guardian, nor had any custodian relation to the child, and when the court ordered and decreed that the biracial biological parents of the child are fit to parent their child, and when the trial court ordered and decreed that the white couple committed fraud upon the court to procure the court jurisdiction so as to determine their petition for “parental custody”. 2. Whether the State Court has the inherent power to bar the Appellants’ from accessing the court bringing motions under CR 60 to challenge the Jurisdiction of the court or violation of Appellants’ constitutional rights until the Appellate court has il rendered its decision on Appeal and issue of the mandate. 3. Whether the state court violated Appellants’ constitutional rights to parent their own child, especially that it lacked jurisdiction to begin with. 4. Whether the Court of Appeals violated the constitutional rights of Appellants to due process and : equal protection when it denied Appellants their right to a meaningful hearing by the Court of Appeals itself; and denied Appellants a decision by that Court of Appeals solely resting on the basis of the record, and precluded any further review of its violations on the basis of the record. 5. Whether the state Supreme Court violated Appellants’ constitutional rights to due process, equal protection of the law, and access to the court when it denied the Appellants the right to a hearing before disposition of Appellants’ claims of the court of appeals’ own violations of Appellants’ constitutional rights, which were only revealed after the Court of Appeals issued its opinion; especially that the Appellate Rules of Procedure do not allow rehearing after denial of the petition for review. 6. Whether repetitive violations of the constitutional rights of more than one single litigant of a special racial group by the same state appellate court necessitate “scrutiny” of the State Court proceedings.