10 Divorce Facts about the Family Courts Your Attorney Won't Tell You

FACT ONE:

Family Courts are run unconstitutionally, without proper due process, and without respecting the civil and Constitutional rights of parents every day.

This has caused millions of children to be stripped from fit and loving parents and to miss out on the benefit of seeing extended family members like siblings, grandparents, aunts, and uncles.

FACT TWO:

Under the Constitution, as well as U.S. Supreme Court case law, Family Court judges have no legal authority to assign custody of a child or terminate any parental rights without “clear and convincing evidence” (a high standard) that a parent is harmful to a child.

Not using proper standards has caused parents to beat each other up unnecessarily, live in fear, and develop severe anxiety and PTSD.

FACT THREE:

A showing that a parent is unfit is required to terminate any parental rights, including placing you as "visitor". Even if “unfitness” is proven in the case of fundamental Constitutional rights, judges are required to take the minimum possible steps to protect the child without infringing on these rights. Clearly this is not done with instant and boilerplate “visitation” that partially and unethically remove one parent from a child's life.

This has caused children to be insecure in not knowing when they will see each of their parents. This has allowed the courts to make egregious errors in their custody orders where they practically eliminate one of the parents based on nothing more than empty accusations.

FACT FOUR:

The Supreme Court stated that "liberty interest of parents in the care, custody, and control of one's children is perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests" recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court, Troxel v. Granville, 530 US 57, 65 (2000).

FACT FIVE:

The Supreme Court stated that "we recognize that a mother's right to custody of her children is a personal right entitled to at least as much protection as her right to alimony.", May v. Anderson, 345 U.S. 528, 534 (1952).

Yet this will be denied to you.

FACT SIX:

"The parent-child relationship is an important interest that undeniably warrants deference." Lassiter v. Department of Social Services, 452 U.S. 18, 27 (1981).

FACT SEVEN:

The divorce court is run for the ease and egos of judges and to maximize the money that lawyers make by separating the parties and causing as much fighting as possible. It also appears that the judges are actively providing forced labor of disfavored parents to the state so that the state can recieve Title IV-D payments and are imposing legal penalties on those disfavored parents who do NOT labor sufficiently to meet the unequal income-based standard of care that has been illegally imposed on them. The “best interests of the children” is a distant fourth priority at best.

FACT EIGHT:

Family court judges do not care what the law says and will do whatever they want because they have legislated themselves near total immunity. You only have the rights that you demand and show you are willing to fight for by calling that judge to task with hard evidence, case law citations, judicial complaints, and suits in federal court.

FACT NINE:

The U.S. Constitution contains a Supremacy Clause asserting that it and any laws made complient to it by Congress are the supreme law of the land and any state constitutional provision, statute, or rule that conflicts with the federal constitution or with federal law is a nullity.

The Supremacy Clause is found in Article VI which also contains a requirement that all state and federal government officials including judges swear an oath to abide by this Supremacy Clause. Additionally, state and federal judges are required to swear an enhanced duty to be bound by the Supremacy Clause whereby they agree to declare void any state law that conflicts with federal law. The family codes in all 50 states are plainly unconstitutional when they require judges to enter judicial proceedings predetermined to rule in favor of the interests of a nonlitigant child against the rights of both parents and against the rights of the child. The child support statutes in these states require these judges to provide to the child an entitlement to a percentage of one parent's income and to access a legal scheme whereby that parent can be legally punished for failing to work.

The Supremacy Clause works to ensure that every state has but one code of laws that includes all federal laws and includes federal constitutional protections as if those protections were written directly into each and every state statute. This is NOT new information. The Supreme Court has held this to be the law of the land of the state for many decades and has clearly held that state officials and specifically child custody judges are NOT free to ignore federal law or to fail to enforce its limitations on state action.

These judges can NOT credibly claim to be competent judges and simultaniously NOT to understand these very basic rules of American law. In fact, codes of judicial conduct generally require judges to be competent in the law and to faithfully follow the law. Child custody judges are intentionally violating state codes of judicial conduct and the oaths they swore to be bound to the United States Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land.

FACT TEN:

Under the Constitution, no state is allowed to make any law that deprives individuals of private rights protected by the federal constitution. There is NO question but that each parent has personal parental rights that are required to be individually protected under federal law. These rights do NOT come from any marriage and they can NOT be denied as a result of any marital choices. When the state does so, the state is committing marital discrimination. The Supreme Court has clearly held that child custody judges are state actors whose best interests of the child determinations are exercises of merely "substantial" state policy interests that is entirely insufficient to justify infringing private fundamental rights protected by the compelling justification standard.