Standing up to the Abuse of Power

okay today is day nine and we are wrapping up the 14th Amendment we dealt with the due process calls last time and this time we're wrapping up with the equal protection Clause the two most powerful things we have in our Arsenal and so this is the 14th Amendment part two so very quickly we're going to walk through the outline you've already seen this outline in the last class and I'm going to show you where we're picking up today and where we're completing it so we dealt with the due process clause and that's why you see that lined out the next thing is the equal protection Clause the part of that section one of the 14th Amendment and

remember the other sections of the 14th Amendment no longer apply because they dealt with individuals being prohibited from certain things because they'd served in the Confederacy and all of those people are along since passed away so we're only dealing with section one so we're going to talk about equal protection what it means where it comes from how it applies we're going to clarify again that it applies to all persons not just Citizens We're going to talk about how equal protection is fundamental to the concept of Freedom it's one of the fundamental principles of how we and the courts ensure freedom and the concept existed long before the 14th amendment was ratified and it's something that the

federal courts have sought to um Implement long before the 14th Amendment but the 14th amendment applies that concept specifically to the states so they have to comply with it as well it deals with classifications or how we group people and treat those groups differently than other groups and this is a legitimate function of government we have to be able to categorize people and provide benefits or curtel certain activities with certain groups there are criminal groups there are law- abiding groups for instance we have to be able to treat people who are within that criminal group differently than we do people who are within the law- abiding group so that in many cases is a natural normal

and perfectly acceptable classification but there are other classifications there're not and we'll talk about this term invidious and what it means and how the court uses it you'll see it all the time in equal protection cases we'll understand how the court has said that the rights must be the same for married par for married and unmarried alike and basically what they're saying is the classification of marital status cannot be used to discriminate against people in many many situations and so we're going to we're going to suggest based on what the Supreme Court has we think very clearly said and that is that that fit parents are the only applicable or acceptable class when it comes to equal protection

of parental rights we're going to show how your parental rights are not tied to the marriage now 100 years or more ago it was a very common concept that rights to be a parent were directly tied to the marriage and we had things called bastardy laws that prohibited children and parents from having rights to one another if they were if the children were conceived out of wedlock those ideas have changed and we'll show you how and why and make the clear argument that your parental rights cannot be connected to your marriage therefore dissolving your marriage cannot be the basis for depriving you of those rights we'll talk about Stanley versus Illinois and some other cases

that get into how the treat the courts are required to treat single parents the same as married parents so they can't discriminate against single parents and that means your rights are yours individually each parent has those rights individually they don't belong to the marriage and we'll talk about the bastardy laws and how those were overturned by the United States Supreme Court what we're going to do first is we are going to practice when a judge is keeping your child from you okay okay yeah your honor to the Court's Jurisdiction to issue orders in violation of the fourth and fifth amendment I have a right to privacy and this this order constitutes a unwarranted search into my private

business the court has failed to meet the Constitutional requirements to order a search further this order constitutes an illegal seizure of my person and forces me to be restrained in a certain place I object to that and further because the court is seeking to punish me with deprivation of a fundamental liberty interest the court invokes Fifth Amendment criminal protections and I assert my Fifth Amendment right not to be compelled to testify and not to have that uh against me to deprive me of a fundamental liberty interest in any way objection your honor objection your honor ass objection asserting that I have something to hide is a violation of my constitutional right I wish that that

be stricken from the record your honor honor this is about what's best interest children does no objection your honor this is not about what's in the best interest of children it's about who gets to decide what is in the best interest of the children and we have privacy rights as individuals to be free from government interference into our private lives we have it as adults our children have it and I assert on my behalf and my child's behalf objection your honor argumentative and inflammatory you cannot sit here in violation of the Fifth Amendment and tell me I have a problem for asserting my constitutional rights and my child point the judge is going to let the

attorney the other attorney talk they're not going to let you the parent keep talking so the judge is going to go to the attorney and say please proceed with what we're here for today um on the record that what we're here for today is to have Mr Palmer go through this psych evaluation so we not to child this done objection your honor I would like to file on the record objections for error on theill that this is a violation of my fourth amendment rights my child's Fourth Amendment rights this constitut a an unwarranted fure of my child say Mr Palmer I've already ruled on this I understand that you object the record reflects your reject your

objection I also have overruled your objections I believe that we have the authority according to statute you have not shown me that you have any reason for me to consider not following statute your honor I object in that you have not met the Constitutional bar to intervene statute alone is not sufficient to provide the court jurisdiction to act Mr versus Granville tells us that the court must have a finding effect on the record that provides some basis for the Court's action and that that basis must include a balancing test of all of the rights involved and so they they must apply these standards even if it cost more or if it's more burdensome on the court so

they cannot say that hey we deal with thousands of these divorce cases we can't possibly apply this level of scrutiny to everyone well they don't get to say that they must apply the proper levels of scrutiny if they're going to going to deprive rights and you are learning how to hold them accountable to that