Is it an abuse of discretion for a district court, when there is a proper request by the accused, to refuse to conduct reasonable voir dire inquiry into racial/ethnic bias in a case involving illegal-immigrant racial-minority defendants accused of marriage and immigration fraud?

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Diann Ramcharan and three others were charged and convicted of immigration fraud involving inter-racial sham marriages. Three defendants, including Ramcharan, are persons of color, and also are not citizens (two are from Trinidad and Tobago and another is African-American). During voir dire, Ramcharan asked the district court to inquire of the jury panel their views on race and ethnicity regarding this case. The district court refused to ask a single question about these things. This Court held that the Constitution requires a trial judge to grant a request for racial-bias questions if “racial issues are inextricably bound up with the conduct of the trial.” Rosales-Lopez v. United States, 451 U.S. 182, 189 (1981). The Tenth Circuit affirmed, finding that since this case dealt with marriage fraud rather than a violent crime against a person of a different race than the accused, there were no “special circumstances” of constitutional dimension requiring such inquiry. The question presented is: Is it an abuse of discretion for a district court, when there is a proper request by the accused, to refuse to conduct reasonable voir dire inquiry into racial/ethnic bias in a case involving illegalimmigrant racial-minority defendants accused of marriage and immigration fraud? i