DAILY TOOL: Can the Majority Vote to Have Your Constitutional Rights Ignored?

TOOL OF THE DAY: Can the Majority Vote to Have Your Constitutional Rights Ignored?

CATEGORY: Family Law caselaw

“Legislators may speak for the majority but even the majority is not at liberty to ignore the Constitution.” ~Michael Bent (alumna of Fix Family Courts training)

“One’ s right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, … and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote …” West Virginia State Bd. of Educ. v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624, 638, 63 S. Ct. 1178, 1185, 87 L.Ed. 1628 (1943)”

More and more students/parents of our courses are making their mark and paving the way for constitutional protections in the family courts. The most recent student to make their mark is Michael Bent of Vancouver, Washington.

Michael took the course “Creating Your BluePrint” almost a year ago. In less than a year, he has written his own appeal and has developed strong arguments to challenge the status quo in his state of Washington.

Michael is refusing to give in to the status quo of violating his and his children’s rights. And even though he had an attorney who feared presenting most of the constitutional protections would offend the Trial Judge, he hasn’t let that stop him.

While it is customary for appellate courts to rule that if the constitutional question was not raised at trial it cannot be raised on appeal, Michael is basing his argument on the “chilling effect” that the court process and practices have had on this requirement.

Michael also learned in our course and from our book, “NOT in the Child’s Best Interest” that constitutional rights cannot be violated by statute and that it is not necessary to raise an objection to that purpose when that is beyond the authority of the state in the first place. He uses “In re Sanders” case from the Supreme Court of the State of Michigan to support that he can ask for relief from an unconstitutional practice even if the unconstitutionality of the statute was not raised at the trial court level.

Michael never gave a knowing and intelligent waiver of his rights. So as long as the record shows that he did not accept the authority of the statutes (and protested to any forced compliance), that he did not try to use the statutes to his benefit, and is not purely using this as an opportunity to re-litigate to gain an advantage that he failed to get at trial, Michael’s argument will be much stronger. (This still does not mean that he does not have a constitutional argument but appellate courts in the past have refused to hear these arguments if not raised at trial.)

Michael’s complaint, and we concur, that most courts operate on the premise that legislators have crafted constitutionally valid statutes (statutes presumed constitutional). Trial courts act oblivious to any rights in divorce or as a single parent in disagreement with the other parent, so they continue to ignore constitutional arguments.

Michael is hoping to overcome these challenges. Especially since his appeal is being heard in one of the more progressive appellate courts in Washington who have been known to allow claims of ‘manifest error affecting a constitutional right’ to be made for the first time on appeal.  Michael awaits to see what the appellate court will decide on this

Michael filed his appeal less than one year after enrolling and completing one course with Fix Family Courts on his family rights. His appeal was scheduled to be previewed yesterday, March 30, 2015.

 

Subscribe at http://www.fixfamilycourts.com/subscribe/ to receive e-mails regarding education and other information regarding tools used to protect and assert your parental rights, family rights, and children’s rights.

Need more help learning what your fundamental family rights are and how they should work:

ENROLL IN THE FAMILY RIGHTS COURSE

This is a 12-week course that teaches you constitutional parental rights. Next time a judge or attorney asks you why you think you should have equal rights and time to your child, you will have more than just a reason, you will have the power and authority behind you and know how to back it up. Take this course if you want to be empowered to stand up to bullying, abuse of power, and hostile treatment.

You can learn this for less than most attorneys charge for two hours of time. Get the course on Protecting Family Rights here, discounted until the end of the month. PROTECTING FAMILY RIGHTS COURSE all online immediately delivery. Watch all the videos from the comfort of your own home. Please enroll me and send me access to this course. ENROLL ME NOW. When you click on any of those links and e-mail will be sent to me and I will send you an invoice. Once the invoice is paid, you will be sent a link to access the entire Protecting Family Rights course.

Need something you can read to understand your rights better, get the book, the classes, and watch the videos at: http://www.fixfamilycourts.com/

 

*We are not attorneys. We urge you to have your attorney integrate this material into your case and to seek legal advice regarding your rights.

Divorce Solutions and Child Custody Solutions

Co-author “Not in the Child’s Best Interest” (Book on parental rights and children’s rights)

Co-author “Protecting Parent-Child Bonds: 28th Amendment” (Book includes guide for legislators)

Website: www.fixfamilycourts.com

Twitter: https://twitter.com/fixfamilycourts (@fixfamilycourts)

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Fix-Family-Courts/324146134354536

YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_kKO3Xc_UT7ZeNU6OkYK0g/

E-mail: Sherry@fixfamilycourts.com

Phone: 214-901-2529

 

Disclaimer: I am NOT an attorney or a lawyer. I do NOT practice law in any federal or State court system. Any information provided by me to you, regardless of how specific, is NOT intended to be legal advice under any state or federal law. I provide research, written strategies, and non-professional personal opinions on the Constitution and State laws as free exchange of politically important information that also serves an important public need and interest allowed under the First Amendment. You are highly encouraged to engage an attorney in your State to help you with the specifics of your legal issues and the law in your State. If you are a pro se litigant then you bear all and full responsibility for understanding the law in your state and acting under the law in your state. Nothing you receive from me is intended to be a “legal” document for purposes of any type of filing in any court. You are free to use my words for your personal non-commercial benefit, or as an aide in petitioning your government for redress of perceived wrongs, if properly cited where appropriate. YOU TAKE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY LEGAL ACTIONS YOU PURSUE AND THE RESULTS THAT YOU GET. I BEAR NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR RESULTS. MY OPINIONS ARE NOTHING MORE THAN MY PERSONAL NON-PROFESSIONAL OPINIONS OR BELIEFS. I MAKE NO CLAIMS OF LEGAL COMPETENCY IN THE LAW UNDER ANY GOVERNMENT STANDARD OF COMPETENCY IN THE LAW.

 

The information provided above is not a substitute for the advice of an attorney. You should consult an attorney regarding your rights under the law.

 

PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL:  This electronic mail message and any attached files contain information intended for the exclusive use of the specific individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is proprietary, copyrighted, privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure.  You are hereby notified that any copying, disclosure or distribution of this information is prohibited and may be subject to legal restriction or sanction.  Please notify the sender, by reply electronic mail or telephone, of any unintended recipients and delete the original message and any attachments without making any copies if you are not the intended recipient.  Thank you.