WHAT OF GRANDPARENTS’ “RIGHTS”?

WHAT’S THE SOURCE OF GRANDPARENTS’ “RIGHTS”?

what-of-grandparent-rights-2016– thefitparentsrights

A fit parent’s “liberty” is defined as the right to establish a home and direct the upbringing of one’s children.  Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 399 (1923). Such is what makes it a “liberty interest”. This liberty interest is fundamental to the citizens of the United States of America.Washington v. Glucksberg, 117 S.Ct. 2258, 2268, 521 U.S. 702, 720-21 (U.S.Wash.,1997).

Therefore, this right is protected by the Due Process Clause of 14th Amendment to the  United States Constitution.

This means, if the state-as in a judge- wants to infringe or terminate this fundamental liberty interest, he or she had better apply the process due to a parent first. Otherwise, its action is explicitly forbidden. Id. at 721. If the state cannot show that it has a narrowly tailored compelling interest, then the state cannot touch the fit parent’s right at all. Ibid. No other avenue is constitutionally available to accomplish state action, which will adversely affect a parent’s fundamental liberty interest.

grandparent-alienation-2016

If a parent appeals an adverse action by a state which has affected his or her fundamental liberty interest, the reviewing Court must apply the Strict Scrutiny standard of review, to determine whether the state action was indeed achieved without the state showing that it had a narrowly tailored compelling interest to take the action it did. Id. Grandparent Family Bond Obstryction - Public Health Crisis -- 2016This is a compulsory standard. It’s not an option. Nowhere does it say that if the reviewing Court has sat down and collectively decided, for whatever arbitrary reasoning, that it should apply a lesser standard, that it can do so.

That being said, tell me. Where exactly do Grandparents’ “Rights”, come from? When a parent is brought before a Court and his or her fundamental liberty interest is at stake, there are only TWO competing interests here- the parent’s and the state’s. Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745, 759-60 (U.S.N.Y., 1982). If the parent is fit, then the child’s interest, coincides with his or her fit parent’s. Id. at 745, 748, 760-761 (1982). The child’s interest does not stand alone. As such is the case, where exactly-constitutionally- does the Grandparent’s so called “interest” fit into the equation? I can tell you where-nowhere- because they don’t have any “rights”- not under these United States’ Constitution..

no-system-ever-devised-to-cause-so-much-harm-as-family-court-2016

The Justices who decided Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000), deliberately failed to apply the Strict Scrutiny standard of review, to the threatened fundamental liberty interest of the mother in that case for this precise reason.

Grandparent Child Relationship Obstruction - 2016Instead, it applied a less stringent standard, having nothing to do with the 14th Amendment, so that it could leave room for the individual states, to concoct their own particular processes by which each could infringe or even, as in my case, terminate the liberty interests of fit parents, by averting the Due Process Clause. In other words, applying the wrong standard gave state legislatures the power to enact laws granting such “rights” to grandparents to intervene into divorce and custody disputes. Under the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution, this “standing” does not exist.

Because of the Troxel Court’s “instructions” as the state of Georgia refers to the case, Clark v. Wade, 273 Ga. 587,  603-604 (2001), this state claimed that it had the power to sever my custodial relationship with my child, remove her from my home, terminate my legal rights to her and “award” “custody”, to her paternal grandparents- all without finding me unfit. Isn’t that something? After serving my country and vowing to die if need be, to defend the United States Constitution, my own rights were snatched right from under me. It said that it had the parens patriae power to do what it thought was “best” for my child. It had and has, no such power. Neither does any other state.

Here’s why.

Number 1., Washington, 521 U.S. at 721 says the state can’t do anything with a child without first proving that it has a narrowly tailored compelling interest.

2. The state can’t achieve such interest without following the bifurcated steps established in Santosky, 455 U.S. at 745, 748, 760-761 .

3. Before we even get to any of all this, the state is explicitly prohibited from applying the best interest standard between a parent and a third party to begin with. Reno v. Flores, 507 U.S. 292, 303-304 (1993).

Nevertheless, there are parents across America whose constitutional rights to their children have been deprived by state action, under color of law. This has been a collective, nationwide violation, extending from the top of our judicial system, to the bottom. This is the state of America today.

But for the United States Supreme Court’s decision in 2000, I would not have been robbed of my right to continue to have the home that I had established for my child, or my right to continue to raise her, so long as I was fit. Grandparent Contact Denial - 2016

I know that such willful deprivation is actionable under federal civil and criminal law against state officials. I also know that one must request relief from the very defendants and perpetrators who have violated him or her- a futile effort that I learned the hard way.  My question is, what happens when the willful deprivation comes from the top?

***I am a paralegal. I am not a licensed attorney. Anything I’ve posted here or on this site, may not and should not be construed as legal advice. If you are in need of legal advice, please consult with a licensed attorney. If you are in Cobb County, Georgia, good luck.

Source: WHAT’S THE SOURCE OF GRANDPARENTS’ “RIGHTS”? – thefitparentsrights

Crazy women are NOT that skilled at hiding their crazy

On men, women and victims

There is a part of me that sparks a gag reflex when I think about writing dating advice claptrap. And while I am still not going to sink into such pablum, some responses to a meme I recently made reminded me of a theme I have seen echoed through parts of what some would call the manosphere for years.

The best explanation would be to show you the meme I placed on Facebook, highlighting one of the early comments to it:

And now the comment:

Continue reading

Should People with Multiple Personalities or Dissociative Identity Disorder Be Parents?

we-lose-20163

Excerpt
Arcadia Child My photos that have a creative c...The voices of children raised by a mother who claims to have multiple personalities is barely a whisper. The Psychology Industry is responsible for conducting research and insuring that mental health care is safe and effective but in the instance of multiple personalities, professionally referred to as Dissociative Identity Disorder or DID,  researchers lag way behind in connecting science to this mental malady that remains one of the largest debacles in the industry according to Paul McHugh, M.D., former head of psychiatry at Johns Hopkins University, USA.

iINGUANZO V. ROSE - CAUSES 2015

The Family Court is WRONG!!The wheels of research is known to pump out information about mental illnesses rapidly, but is lagging behind on studying the long-term effects of what I refer to as Generation Two meaning the children of parents who suffer from multiple personalities.

Continue reading

Let there be justice in America, and let it begin with the U.S. Department of Justice.

Facebook shared a post of mine about Opt IN USA from exactly one year ago today. In realizing that the campaign has been consistently described since then, I thought about complaints I've received that not everyone understands and can relate to Opt IN USA. Of course I cannot imagine being unsure of whether I've been persecuted or psychologically tortured through misuse of administrative (as in quasi-judicial) or court (as in judicial) proceedings in America. It seems those of us unfortunate enough to have had such an experience would realize it happened or is happening. And Opt IN USA would speak to our embattled souls, even if aspects of the campaign left some of us confused. While anything can be simplified, not everything is simple. To thoroughly understand the problem of persistent U.S. legal system abuse is to perceive all of its complexities, which is helpful in devising solutions through which Opt IN USA constituents can be made whole. Opt IN USA is about much more than being on the losing end of legal proceedings. Instead, the campaign identifies and addresses distinct patterns of judicial (including quasi-judicial) conduct and case outcomes that evidence deliberate violations of rights. Moreover, Opt IN USA links the failure of America's current legal and political processes to redress this ominous problem to certain of their structural/logistical deficiencies. These deficiencies manifest as inadequate judicial oversight. In other words, Opt IN USA goes beyond scandal advocacy, i.e., the process of "exposing" specific U.S. legal system bad guys in hopes of evoking enough outrage to get them ousted and reparations extended for their misdeeds. Instead, the campaign focuses on exposing how U.S. government unduly insulates this class of culprits from accountability and the devastation heaped on countless Americans, including children, as a result. The goal of Opt IN USA and its sister organizations is to trigger genuine reform . . . not when the targeted bad guys are adequately proven to be bad or society is adequately protective of their victims, but when it is clear that everyone CONSCIOUSLY acquiescing to inadequate judicial oversight in America is complicit in the resulting harm. True, Opt IN USA gets a bit "high brow" at times. But that is to reach Ivory Towers in which our complaints are dismissed as mere rantings of the confused, uninformed, misguided, and disgruntled. Our message must resonate there, arguably more than anywhere. As direct action is undertaken on Main Street, Opt IN USA and its sister organizations help ensure such efforts are not undermined by credible propaganda flowing from any Ivory Tower. Surely not everyone discontent with America's legal system has a well-founded complaint. But it is only through a fair and impartial administration of justice that our legitimate grievances can be properly sorted from those that are unfounded. America owes all of its citizens a fair and impartial administration of justice. Learn more, join our efforts, and otherwise support Opt IN USA by visiting https://m.facebook.com/Opt.IN.USA/
Facebook shared a post of mine about Opt IN USA from exactly one year ago today. In realizing that the campaign has been consistently described since then, I thought about complaints I’ve received that not everyone understands and can relate to Opt IN USA.
Of course I cannot imagine being unsure of whether I’ve been persecuted or psychologically tortured through misuse of administrative (as in quasi-judicial) or court (as in judicial) proceedings in America. It seems those of us unfortunate enough to have had such an experience would realize it happened or is happening. And Opt IN USA would speak to our embattled souls, even if aspects of the campaign left some of us confused.
While anything can be simplified, not everything is simple.
To thoroughly understand the problem of persistent U.S. legal system abuse is to perceive all of its complexities, which is helpful in devising solutions through which Opt IN USA constituents can be made whole.
Opt IN USA is about much more than being on the losing end of legal proceedings. Instead, the campaign identifies and addresses distinct patterns of judicial (including quasi-judicial) conduct and case outcomes that evidence deliberate violations of rights. Moreover, Opt IN USA links the failure of America’s current legal and political processes to redress this ominous problem to certain of their structural/logistical deficiencies. These deficiencies manifest as inadequate judicial oversight.
In other words, Opt IN USA goes beyond scandal advocacy, i.e., the process of “exposing” specific U.S. legal system bad guys in hopes of evoking enough outrage to get them ousted and reparations extended for their misdeeds. Instead, the campaign focuses on exposing how U.S. government unduly insulates this class of culprits from accountability and the devastation heaped on countless Americans, including children, as a result.
The goal of Opt IN USA and its sister organizations is to trigger genuine reform . . . not when the targeted bad guys are adequately proven to be bad or society is adequately protective of their victims, but when it is clear that everyone CONSCIOUSLY acquiescing to inadequate judicial oversight in America is complicit in the resulting harm.
True, Opt IN USA gets a bit “high brow” at times. But that is to reach Ivory Towers in which our complaints are dismissed as mere rantings of the confused, uninformed, misguided, and disgruntled. Our message must resonate there, arguably more than anywhere. As direct action is undertaken on Main Street, Opt IN USA and its sister organizations help ensure such efforts are not undermined by credible propaganda flowing from any Ivory Tower.
Surely not everyone discontent with America’s legal system has a well-founded complaint. But it is only through a fair and impartial administration of justice that our legitimate grievances can be properly sorted from those that are unfounded. America owes all of its citizens a fair and impartial administration of justice.
Learn more, join our efforts, and otherwise support Opt IN USA by visiting https://m.facebook.com/Opt.IN.USA/

divorcecorp-judge-scalia-quote-on-judicial-system-perception-2016Power Over Poverty Under Laws of America Restored ~  Opt-IN-USA

people-who-are-crazy-enough-to-think-they-can-change-the-world-are-the-ones-who-do

Let there be justice in America, and let it begin with the U.S. Department of Justice.7f420-injustice

At best, if the targeted conduct is graphic and filmed and public outcry is intense, we get “police accountability” . . . an oxymoron given the DOJ’s notorious…

https://www.facebook.com/POPULAR4people/
Calling on all Americans who do not want the ruling class through major media to keep unrest focused exclusively on blue collar cops while elite lawyers, powerful prosecutors, and judges operate with virtual impunity in this country. Please join us in PUMPING UP THE PROTEST! Kindly circulate this message and do whatever you lawfully can to affirm that no one in America should be above the U.S. Constitution and certainly not the country’s law enforcement and correction officials, private lawyers, prosecutors, and judges. Thank you!

Opt-IN-USA  · LINKEDIN.COM

Please join us in PUMPING UP THE PROTEST! Kindly circulate this message and do whatever you lawfully can to affirm that no one in America should be above the U.S. Constitution and certainly not the country’s law enforcement and correction officials, private lawyers, prosecutors, and judges.

Thank you!Low Hanging Fruit Opt-in USA NFJA - 2016

The prospect of Joseph P. Carson securing the support of our national grassroots legal/judicial reform community transforms his 25 year long quest for OSC and MSPB accountability into a potential judicial accountability coup d’etat in America.

family-civil-rights-movement-2015

We identified it as an international human rights issue. We learned that a potentially insurmountable obstacle to relief was America’s failure to ratify th……See More

This note is to encourage some very practical steps in mobilizing to address human rights violations through U.S. legal system abuse as part of Opt IN USA and its coalition partners. Please accept our apology if you receive this message via multiple communication channels. We want it to reach as many people as possible contending with U.S. legal system abuse and related judicial misconduct. Some d……  See More

Again, Opt IN USA attributes the ineffectiveness of America’s legal system in redressing entrenched legal system abuse to a synergy of:quiescent lawyers and judges, subdued by the prospect of retaliatory professional discipline;ineffective federal agencies such as the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the Office of Special Counsel;See More

6468912_orig3

“What the proverbial ‘Powers That Be’ seem to miss is that when their noses are all red from being snubbed at rank and file Americans, implementation of the U.S. Constitution has become an arbitrary and capricious process; no more Rule of Law.”Three Ring Circus - 3 Ring Circus - AFLA Blog - 2015

Continue reading

The most critical flaws of the current child-support system

~ Facebook Event ~

Here are four of the most critical flaws of the current child-support system.

The system is outdated.

The child-support system was originally a bipartisan policy reform designed to serve divorced parents who were steadily employed. But the system was established nearly 40 years ago, and is based on outdated stereotypes that viewed Mom as a housewife and Dad as the sole breadwinner.

The system makes it particularly tough on low-income fathers.

29 percent of families in the system live below the federal poverty line. Many fathers sincerely want to do right by their children, but simply don’t have the means to do so. That becomes a very slippery slope for a lot of dads.

When unpaid child-support payments accumulate, this often snowballs into another issue: parental alienation. Research has shown that men with outstanding child-support debts tend to be less involved in their children’s lives. Some even find themselves incarcerated over unpaid payments.

I ruined my ex - 2015
~ Facebook Event ~

The “deadbeat dad” myth.

Continue reading

Evidence-Based Approaches to Children’s Needs

We invite interested scholars, child and family professionals, and members of civil society to join us in this exciting new co-parenting venture.

We are looking for reporting proposals that dive deeply into a region or reach broadly across the country, particularly those with potential for radio. (If you have radio skills, that’s a plus.). We plan to establish reporting partnerships in some cases, award freelance contracts in others. This initiative will continue into 2017, so ambitious ideas are welcome.

There is no question that our family law statutes need to be reformed and that there is a great deal of ‘judicial discretion’ in family

Family Court Judges - 2016Family Court Judges2 - 2016

2016 : International Year of Co-Parenting

No Test of Parenting FITNESS - 2015

The first international shared parenting organization has been established to develop evidence-based approaches to the needs and rights of children whose parents are living apart.

Responding to the alarming increase in psycho-social and developmental problems among children whose parents are living apart, 26 leading research scientists, family professionals and representatives of civil society from 11 countries gathered in Bonn, Germany, on 21-23 February 2014 to found a new international organization focused on the feasibility of shared parenting as a viable and beneficial solution for children.

The new association will be known as the International Council on Shared Parenting (ICSP). Shared parenting, according the organization’s by-laws, refers to the equivalent, alternating care of children by their separated parents. The purpose of the association is first, the dissemination and advancement of scientific knowledge on the needs and rights (“best interests”) of children whose parents are living apart, and second, to formulate evidence-based recommendations about the legal, judicial and practical implementation of shared parenting.

Your correspondent, Edward Kruk, of the University of British Columbia (Canada), was elected as President of the new association. The international Council on Shared Parenting is the only international, research-centered association to focus squarely on the emerging paradigm of shared parenting. We have compiled a large body of new research examining child and parent outcomes in shared parenting families, and we seek to integrate this scientific data into family law, policy, and professional practice in the best interests of children.

Vice President Dr. Chantal Clot-Grangeat, Chambéry (France), stated, “Our aim is to find solutions for reducing the problems of children known to arise from family breakdown, such as diminished self-esteem, depression, and possible parental alienation, as well as educational failure, substance abuse, and trouble with the law.” 

Coparenting / International Year of Coparenting‘s eventThe Equal Parent Presumption: Social Justice in the Legal Determination of Parenting After Divorce  http://www.ILoveAndNeedMyDaughter.blogspot.com.  Just now · Miami, FL ·

The trial court modified the parenting plan to designate Father as the primary residential parent.

Mother appealed.

On Appeal: The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court.

Mother argued her failure to notify Father of Child’s relocation to Texas was a “single violation” that did not rise to the level of a material change justifying a change of custody.

Tennessee courts apply a two-step analysis to requests to change the primary residential parent designation. The threshold issue is whether a material change in circumstance has occurred since the court’s prior custody order. Only if a material change in circumstance has occurred does the court consider whether a modification is in the child’s best interest.

In determining whether a material change has occurred, courts consider the following factors: (1) whether a change has occurred after the entry of the order sought to be modified; (2) whether a change was not known or reasonably anticipated when the order was entered; and (3) whether a change is one that affects the child’s well-being in a meaningful way.

Not every change in circumstance is a material change; the change must be significant before it will be considered material. However, the change does not have to pose a substantial risk of harm to the child. A material change of circumstance may include, but is not limited to, failures to adhere to the parenting plan.

Mother is correct that courts are disinclined to allow a single incident to serve as the basis for changing a primary residential parent designation. For example, in Beckham v. Beckham, the Court stated:

[A]n apparently isolated episode of poor judgment . . . is insufficient to establish a material change of circumstance. If that were the case, no parent ever would be able to maintain custody of his or her children as parents are inherently human and fallible. A parent is not required to be perfect or error free in his/her parenting in order to avoid there being a material change of circumstances.

After reviewing the record, the Court concluded:

[W]e find Mother’s argument unavailing because the lack of notice of her move to Texas is not the sole basis for finding a material change in circumstance. The change in circumstance can best be described as a lack of stability in the life of Mother since she was designated primary residential parent. As the record reflects, Mother’s move to Texas was not her only move, and Mother’s moves have directly impacted [Child] by necessitating changes in schools. As Mother conceded, [Child’s] support system has been “rocky.” At the same time, while his life may have lacked stability at the time of the divorce due to his military career and deployments, Father’s life has become more stable.

After a thorough review of the record, we find that Father did show a material change in circumstance. Mother’s move to Texas, by itself, may not rise to the level of a material change in circumstance, but the Texas move coupled with the prior eleven years of moves does.

Accordingly, the trial court’s change of custody was affirmed.

Skowronski v. Wade (Tennessee Court of Appeals, Middle Section, October 27, 2015).

Information provided by K.O. Herston: Knoxville, Tennessee Divorce and Family Law Attorney.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Herston on Tennessee Family Law

Facts: Father and Mother, the parents of Child, divorced in 2003. Mother was named the primary residential parent. Father received minimal parenting time because, at the time of divorce, he was active duty military and subject to multiple deployments.

texas moveIn 2013, Father petitioned for a change of custody. He alleged Mother relocated to Texas without providing notice. He further alleged her home provided an unstable environment.

The proof showed Mother moved 11 times since the divorce, thereby forcing Child to change school seven times. Many of Mother’s moves were caused by her unstable employment history. Conversely, Father had exhibited much more stability.

Child testified that her preference was to stay with Mother, with whom she had lived the majority of her life.

The trial court modified the parenting plan to designate Father as the primary residential parent.

Mother appealed.

On Appeal: The Court of Appeals

View original post 515 more words

Have you been defrauded by family court judges, lawyers and experts?

…working in suspected collusion to create deliberate conflict for cash?

Are Family Law Judges Fit For Purpose?

One of Researching Reform’s interests is judicial bias – the extent to which judges allow their personal sentiments to dictate the way they handle their cases – so the recent furore over Justice Pauffley’s remarks about hitting children and cultural…

Justice Pauffley’s remarks, in which she told the court that foreign families who hit their children should be made allowances for due to cultural norms, seem odd given that hitting a child is still not illegal, and applies to all families, both foreign and not, residing here. But bias is a varied and often unpredictable phenomenon and doesn’t always guarantee a linear pattern of thought.

Justice Pauffley’s comments have always been direct and searingly honest – she has openly criticized the flaws inside the justice system and takes a no nonsense approach to poor professional practice. Her comment in this most recent case though, suggests a deep-seated attitude towards hitting children.

These sorts of difficulties are echoed in the slow nature in which family law judges have taken to trying to grasp the Voice of the Child. Many judges, despite having children of their own, seem completely at sea with children and unable to engage with them when it matters most – to help amplify their wishes and feelings, so they can be seen as well as heard. That children are still so misunderstood, or not understood at all in most cases, is testimony to the fact that our judicial system remains wanting.

It’s time for the Bar to select individuals who are experienced, plugged in and in touch with the world around them. And just as importantly, to find those who are passionate about children and helping to ensure the best possible outcomes for them. Better training too is needed for our current family law judges, so that they can learn to keep any biases in check and carry out their work in a professional and competent manner.

From: Are Family Law Judges Fit For Purpose?

The FBI has requested a list of New Jersey people who have been defrauded by family court judges, lawyers and experts working in suspected collusion to create deliberate conflict for cash. Please forward: Name,  Address,  Email,  Phone,  County,  Judge

We need this no later than December 15th. Thanks. Groberts@fclu.org

bad-judges-2015

http://WWW.CAUSES.COM

Family Law Report – Susan Settenbrino- Misconduct by Judges – Part 2
Joe Sorge interviews NYC attorney Susan Settenbrino about the damage done by biased and corrupt judges. In Part 2, judicial misconduct is discussed in depth. Consider registering for the family law reform conference this November: http://www.divorcecorp.com/reform-2/. People from around the country will be there to discuss how we can work together for meaningful change.

LeMieux forgot confirming judge  —  On Saturday, the four front-runners in the race to unseat Bill Nelson in the US Senate participated in a debate hosted by the Florida Family Policy Council and Central Florida Tea Party Council. One of the topics discussed was judicial activism. Javier Manjarres from the Shark Tank reportedSee More

“A big issue at the forum was the topic of Judicial activist.  Childrens Rights Florida and American Fathers Liberation Army 

Paul Evans, convicted of murder by due process beyond reasonable doubt, pictured here with Judge Martinez who protected his life. Not pictured is Alan Pfeiffer, killed by Evans for cash.  In 1991 Connie Pfeiffer asked several of her friends to help her carry out the murder of her husband. After several refusals, one of h…  Continue Reading

Overturning Elections  —  Does the Florida Supreme Court think that it has the power to overturn an election? According to current Justices Pariente and Lewis, it does. Justice Quince seemed not committal in 2000, but willing to do so in 2010 (see the Health Care Freedom Act).  In 2000, the Florida Supreme Court overturned a ballot initiative tha…  Continue Reading

5c0d0-anti-familyAccountable Judges  —  A response to Florida Bar President Mayanne Downs

Last week we announced a voter education effort to help provide voters information about judges so that they can make informed decisions on Election Day. For far too long the court system has been cloaked in a shroud of secrecy that makes it difficult for voters to decid…  Continue Reading 

The Florida Supreme Court has been on a concerning activist trajectory for the last three decades. Colleen Pero of the American Justice Partnership prepared an excellent report that outlines different types of judicial activism and the decisions made by the Florida Supreme Court which is, in her opinion, evidence of judicial activism.

Of special not…  See More

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact Jesse Phillips  407-494-0316   jphillips@citizen2citizen.us

See More    Report: Florida Bar Board of Governors Meeting Minutes

Here is a copy of a report on the Florida Bar Board of Governors meeting. The most interesting things to note are the legislative agenda items and the paragraph on court funding.

Several judicial heavy-hitters, including four former Florida Supreme Court justices and former governor and U.S. Sen. Bob Graham, will hold a press conference Thursday to oppose sweeping changes to the judicial branch advocated by House Speaker Dean Canno…  See More

Who chooses the judges?

The public perception is that when a vacancy appears on an appellate court such as the state Supreme Court, that the governor selects the person to fill the vacancy.

In reality, it’s not the governor who makes the determination, it’s a group of unelected individuals, half of which are selected dir…  Continue Reading

florida judges - 2015Rogue Bar Spin Operation  —  A few lawyers on the Florida Bar leadership board have sent out a rogue press release to spin public perception about a conversation they had with Dean Cannon on the judicial reforms being proposed by the Florida House of Representatives. Supposedly, in one conversation the Bar negotiators were able to get the Speaker to abandon one of this legisla…  See More

Cindy Cooper Youell

REMOVE THE JUDGE! Keep US LAW, BUT LET THE JUDGE GO!
FL Bar Opposes Court Reforms
  —  Elected representatives statewide are facing opposition as they attempt to implement some reforms to the judicial system. The opposition is coming from the leadership of the Florida Bar association.

Bar president Mayanne Downs sent an email to lawyers statewide on Friday promising to unleash the full lobbying power of t…  Continue Reading

Supreme Court backs Governor  —  The Supreme Court of Florida ruled on a request made by two state representatives to require Governor Rick Scott to accept federal funds appropriated for the High Speed Rail project.  See More

Obamacare Is Unconstitutional, but it can be implemented anyway  —  Judge Roger Vincent followed his very good decision(that Obamacare is unconstitutional) with a very bad one. Even though it’s unconstitutional, the administration will be allowed to implement it anyway. By the time the Supreme Court hears it, the health care system could be damaged beyond repair.

His decision was based on the fact that the law is s… See More

Fear and secrecy-how the Supreme Court uses the Florida bar to control the legal system  —  As the November elections fade farther into history, voters statewide are busy evaluating one of the most interesting post-election subplots: Florida’s judicial system. Each election voters go to the polls and often replace candidates or even displace political parties from power. Judges, however, always maintain their…  Continue Reading

What is an activist judge?  —  Howard Troxler, writing for the St. Pete Times, raises a good question. Although we disagree with the rhetorical nature of his question and the conclusions he draws in his opinion, his question is a good one, worthy of discussion. He writes:

“When folks complain about ‘activist’ judges, it usually just means they don’t …  Continue Reading

 

By Kenric Ward from Sunshine State News (photo courtesy of Sunshine State News). You can reach Kenric at kward@sunshinestatenews.com or (772) 801-5341.

Florida Supreme Court Justice Jorge Labarga won the highest score in a Bar Association poll, but got the lowest retention vote of any high court judge in state history l…  Continue Reading

The election of President Obama created the phenomenon called the Tea Party. Our biggest concerns were bailouts, Obamacare, and a government headed down a path toward socialism. With the help of God and the spirit of our Founders We the People rose against the government, reminded them not to tread on us, and fixed the Congress in … See More

No Test of Parenting FITNESS - 2015

iINGUANZO V. ROSE - CAUSES 2015Roosevelt said, “One’s dignity maybe assaulted, vandalized and cruelly mocked, but it can never be taken away unless it is surrendered knowing what’s right doesn’t mean much unless you do what’s right” Justices for mother and son plz like and share to free our children from injustices. yes we passed SB594 child custody report, just like that The members are the members we listed in our email. The senate judiciary committee members. This is how legislation goes… We put forward a bill that would’ve made things way better by creating a form for custody evaluations to ensure the state laws for evaluations are followed. However, FLEXCOM (family law attorneys assn), AFCJ, (family court specialists assn) the CA Psychological assn and the Judicial Council (Ca courts) all opposed it and made the committee staff require Us and Sen wieckowski to water the bill down to the point that it doesn’t really help anything. So rather than pass a bill that does nothing to help the problem – and in some cases, would make things worse – we may decide to kill the bill. We’re working to make the bill good again, but if we can’t, we may allow it to die in committee just so that we can get on the public record that the courts aren’t following the laws that they are supposed to (which is the reason all of the groups are opposing the bill). This is how politics and legislation work. Those organization have waaaaay more power than we do. So we have to continue to be strategic to get good laws passed. This was a short version of the situation, but hope it helps.

Here’s an example I think you can relate to: the affordable care act. The original version of the ACA was a single payer, universal system. What it wound up being is a car insurance model that required people to have insurance, and be penalized if they don’t. That was not obama’s original vision, but the current ACA made sure that millions of people who did not have insurance under the old ways, no do under the ACA. It’s always a compromise. Pisses me off that we have to compromise over things like universal healthcare and child protection, but unfortunately, that’s politics. Which is why you should support H. Clinton for president next

After my son saw the news, showing your picture (California Supreme Court Chief Justices Tani Cantil-Sakauye )and saying that $30 million is missing, he said, “Mom, you do not want to go there. You are telling one fox that another fox raided the hen house. What are you thinking?” I told him, “I agree with you, but they are still researching there. Would you like to send them a message? You never know – maybe someone will hear you.” And he wrote, “. I am Saam, I am a child who put up with all of your abuses I have no vote, no say or voice, yet i think i matter. will you tell them that child abuse destroys our future? Now would you listen to me? i have more scars than friends.” the rage is on, tell your story too, Official oppression occurs where a public servant acts pursuant to his office or employment and: 
intentionally subjects another to mistreatment or to arrest, detention, search, seizure, dispossession, assessment, or lien that he knows is unlawful; or intentionally denies or impedes another in the exercise or enjoyment of any right, privilege, power, or immunity, knowing his conduct is unlawful. The crime of tampering with or fabricating physical evidence occurs where a person, knowing that an investigation or official proceeding is pending or in progress: alters, destroys, or conceals any record, document, or thing with intent to impair its verity, legibility, or availability as evidence in the investigation or official proceeding; or makes, presents, or uses any record, document, or thing with knowledge of its falsity and with intent to affect the course or outcome of the investigation or official proceeding. mayday
Terroristic Divorce

How corrupt nazi-like Marin Family Court has torn apart a mother and her son more @http://terroristicdivorce.com

YOUTUBE.COMMissing Years of My Daughter Life by Parental Alienation - 2015

Stand Up For Zoraya
Florida Attorney General
Lawson E. Thomas Courthouse Stop Emotional Child Abuse Bad Judges and Lawyers Reporting page

Chief Judge Bertila Soto of 11th Judicial Circuit - 2015Did you complete your pledge?

COPY THE FOLLOWING:
Dear Honorable Chief Judge Bertila Soto: 

I am disturbed about the injustice perpetrated on Mr. David inguanzo. I am further disturbed about the anger directed at this innocent man by Circuit Court Judge Valerie Manno-Schurr, captured on court transcripts, and her complete lack of sympathy for a man who is the proven victim of lies, including a lie by Ms. Nixa Rose to a Miami-Dade Police Officer, which is a felony in the State of Florida. 

I demand that: Judge Manno-Schurr recuse herself from Mr. Inguanzo’s case (Case Number: 2008-029595-FC17). And that she be demoted from her post as Presiding Judge of the Family Division of the Eleventh Judicial Court of Florida. And that Mr. Inguanzo be reunited with Zoraya Inguanzo WITH an ORDER allowing “Normal and Reasonable Timesharing” IMMEDIATELY.
Respectfully submitted,ONE MILLION SIGNITURES - CAUSES 2015
[Put in Your Name] [Put in Your State of Residence]

another birthday - 2015 STOP COPYING HERE: Please send your emails to all of the following: 1. Chief Judge Bertila Soto, c/o: 

Nothing justifies the minimization or removal of a fit and loving parent from a child's life NOTHING 2015Judicial Engineering Train - 2015

Researching Reform

One of Researching Reform’s interests is judicial bias – the extent to which judges allow their personal sentiments to dictate the way they handle their cases – so the recent furore over Justice Pauffley’s remarks about hitting children and cultural norms fascinated us.

Judicial bias is a very real, and present problem. All of us are prone to bias, and research suggests that even judges are not immune, regardless of how bright or how well educated.

Last year, one of our favourite judges, Baroness Hale, observed that judges lead sheltered lives and that this could in turn jeopardise their ability to adjudicate impartially, and with the necessary kind of life experience.

Justice Pauffley’s remarks, in which she told the court that foreign families who hit their children should be made allowances for due to cultural norms, seem odd given that hitting a child is still not illegal, and…

View original post 244 more words