Constitutional Law Summary for Parents (MAKE CPS COURTS FOLLOW THE LAW)

Donnelly Justice writes

These are the laws they don’t want you to know   The dog book is refereed to as The dependency quick guide and is a wonderful tool to have. There is an extension in the side box for the dependency quick guide as well as the material below to help you win.

Every parent must read this before going into CPS court, do not back down.  I have personally had the minute orders include things that were never said and the transcripts proved it. There have been many cases of transcripts getting changed as well. DO NOT go into this courtroom with the idea that they are ignorant to the constitutionality of CPS because they are the leaders. I can’t tell you to turn your phone on record during these proceedings but I would and I would hang on to it. You have to do what is best for you.

CPS is a,Juvenile court law under ( California rules of civil procedure ), Natural laws do apply.  If your lawyer does not follow the law you must file a complaint with the board if your lawyer doesn’t follow your rights. Complain for ineffective counsel  Object if he doesn’t object to incorrect statements or allegations.   If you do not object you can not file an appeal on those issues and are considered true.  Do not let your lawyer run you, he doesn’t care about you or your child the way you do,  he does this everyday.  Know everything you can in these courts. You are your child’s best interest.  Take your time and read through our website if we haven’t written about it then you will find link for it. The dog book is refereed to as The dependency quick guide is a very important guide for these JV courts.

I am mot a lawyer but I would do what ever it takes to protect my child.  You do what you feel is best.  I am here just to share my experience and find a way for good parents to have fighting chance.

God Bless and may the lord watch and guard you by pacing a hedge of protection around you.  The parent is always in the child’s best interest.

created by Daniel Lee,  ACFC Associate Director

Family Law Reference for Parents

This is the first update to a paper written as a guide for parents and legal professionals on family law. Primarily it is the words of the judges themselves, with some commentary to help explain concepts. Upon updating it became so complicated that it needed to be divided into two parts, and this is now the introductory one. If you wish to learn in more depth, this documents big brother (with full case citations) is available to officers of Childs Best Interest, or to judges and state attorney generals when they send a request on their letterhead to: 357 Dove Valley Collierville, TN 38017.

The relation between family and constitutional law needs to be clearly understood. Constitutional law has “bright lines” that identify areas where the state cannot tread. As of today all states’ family law consists of a jumble of rules and practices, many of which have little to no relation to these bright lines. The ensuing disorder allows judges great and improper discretion.

As I update the original paper, and so to with writing the original, no help was provided from legal professionals. We told hundreds of lawyers, judges, appellate justices, law school professors, state representatives and senators, and attorney generals about the problems in family law. None attempted to refute or add to the information. On a better note, many good rulings have recently been released by the Tennessee Middle and Eastern Section Appellate Courts. Nevertheless, it is clear today there is total failure in family law, and the legal profession in general.

Most of the research and development fell to me, with others providing real and useful input. Don, Chuck, and Dennis, of Ohio PACE, Mike “MD/JD” in California, Murray in Virginia, Karen in Alabama, members of Childs Best Interest across the U.S., and shared parenting advocates who acted as sounding boards and provided assistance in other small or large ways. Also help from the kind student librarians at the University of Memphis Law School Library was very useful and appreciated.

Today in most family law cases attorneys are not raising a constitutional shield to protect their clients. And when they fail to do that, a very cruel thing happens. Not only are one or both parent’s ability to parent their child indefinitely suspended with the state taking permanent jurisdiction of their child, but in legal terminology they will be considered to have voluntarily waived their right to parent their child! That’s pretty harsh to say a parent has voluntarily given this up, when it was only the attorney who failed to raise the constitutional arguments, but that’s the legal standard. If you are a parent not in an intact married relationship, or out of one and haven’t been designated the primary caregiver, somewhere along the line you surrendered your right to parent your child.

The following pages are to help all parents understand their rights in relation to raising their children. Having this knowledge will allow you to defend yourself and your child if ever required.

This document may be freely reproduced, and if doing so please credit the author. If you are in an actual case, please remember this information is not legal advice. Every case is unique and must be tailored accordingly by a litigant acting as their own attorney, or an actual one.

Section 1 Controlling Law

Sections of the Constitutions where parental rights derive

The fundamental liberty interest of natural parents in the care, custody, and management of their child is protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. Santosky v. Kramer United States Supreme Court (1982)

The rights of parents to the care, custody and nurture of their children is of such character that it cannot be denied without violating those fundamental principles of liberty and justice which lie at the base of all our civil and political institutions, and such right is a fundamental right protected by First, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments. Doe v. Irwin United States District Court of Michigan (1977)

Tennessee’s historically strong protection of parental rights and the reasoning of federal constitutional cases convince us that parental rights constitute a fundamental liberty interest under Article I, Section 8 of the Tennessee Constitution Hawk v. Hawk Tennessee Supreme Court (1993)

Parents have comparable interests under our state constitutional protections of liberty and privacy rights. “The right to the custody and control of one’s child is a fiercely guarded right in our society and in our law. It is a right that should be infringed upon only under the most compelling circumstances.” Brooks v. Parkerson Georgia Supreme Court (1995)

A parent’s constitutionally protected right to rear his or her children without state interference, has been recognized as a fundamental “liberty” interest protect by the Fourteenth Amendment and also as a fundamental right derived from the privacy rights inherent in the constitution. In re Smith Washington Supreme Court (1998)

[A] parent’s right to the care, custody, and control of his or her children is a fundamental right protected by article I, section 8 of the Iowa Constitution. Santi v. Santi Iowa Supreme Court (2001)

Parental Autonomy is the condition that exists when a child is not subject to a judge’s jurisdiction

Parental autonomy is grounded in the assumption that natural parents raise their own children in nuclear families, consisting of a married couple and their children. The family has been seen as the “basic building block” of society. Parental autonomy strengthens the family and the entire social fabric “by encouraging parents to raise their children in the best way they can by making them secure in the knowledge that neither the state nor outside individuals may ordinarily intervene.” In re Smith Washington Supreme Court (1998) Note 1: We are aware of 1 parent outside of an intact married family receiving parental autonomy via a consent order. Wickman v. Dixon No.DR-96-1360.01C p.489. Note 2: Presumably parental autonomy exists in adoptive families with either one or two parents, and in natural parents who have sole custody with the other parent’s rights terminated, so it is not tied to married parents.

Parental Rights are Fundamental Liberty Interests

The liberty interest at issue in this case – – the interest of parents in the care, custody, and control of their children — is perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests recognized by this Court Troxel v. Granville United States Supreme Court (2000)

It is well-settled that parents have a liberty interest in the custody of their children. Hence, any deprivation of that interest by the state must be accomplished by procedures meeting the requirements of due process.” Hooks v. Hooks United States Court of Appeals (1985)

Indeed, the right to rear one’s children is so firmly rooted in our culture that the United States Supreme Court has held it to be a fundamental liberty interest protected by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Hawk v. Hawk Tennessee Supreme Court (1993)

Parental Rights also contain Fundamental Privacy Interests

“[p]rivate realm of family life which the state cannot enter” Prince v. Massachusetts United States Supreme Court (1944)

Throughout this century, this Court also has held that the fundamental right to privacy protects citizens against governmental intrusion in such intimate family matters as procreation, child-rearing, marriage, and contraceptive choice. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey United States Supreme Court (1992)

Statutes and rulings that infringe upon fundamental rights are presumptively unconstitutional, and a substantial burden rests on the state, not citizen, to prove its case

It is well settled that, quite apart from the guarantee of equal protection, if a law “impinges upon a fundamental right explicitly or implicitly secured by the Constitution it is presumptively unconstitutional.” Harris v. McRae United States Supreme Court (1980)

The application of strict scrutiny is not flexible at all, and I can find no case in this state where application of this standard has resulted in upholding the challenged law. With the adoption of strict scrutiny, this Court has forced the State of Tennessee into an “all-or-nothing” scenario, where only the most impeccably drafted legislation withstands the slightest possibility of darkening the constitutional doorway. Planned Parenthood of Middle Tennessee v. Sundquist Tennessee Supreme Court (2000) Note: This citation goes beyond saying infringements on fundamental parental rights are presumptively unconstitutional, and clearly states essentially no legislative restrictions on parents will be upheld.

If the classification affects fundamental rights however, there is no presumption of constitutionality, and the classification will be sustained only if justified by a compelling state interest. Coles v. Ryan Illinois Appeals Court (1980)


The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees Due Process and Equal Protection to all

“[n]o state shall.deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws” U.S. Const. Amend. XIV, § 1


The state must meet a threshold prior to infringing upon fundamental rights

First, according to the Washington Supreme Court, the Constitution permits a State to interfere with the right of parents to rear their children only to prevent harm or potential harm to a child. Section 26.10.160(3) fails that standard because it requires no threshold showing of harm. Troxel v. Granville United States Supreme Court (2000)

The right of a parent not to be deprived of parental rights without a showing of fitness, abandonment or substantial neglect is so fundamental and basic as to rank among the rights contained in the State and Federal Constitutions” In re J.P. Utah Supreme Court (1982)

Likewise, following the analysis of the Tennessee Supreme Court in interpreting its state statutes and constitutions, we find that implicit in Georgia cases, statutory and constitutional law is that state interference with parental rights to custody and control of children is permissible only where the health or welfare of a child is threatened. Brooks v. Parkerson Georgia Supreme Court (1995)

For the constitutional requirement to be satisfied, before visitation can be ordered over the objection of the child’s parents, a court must find an actual harm to the child’s health or welfare without such visitation. Williams v. Williams Virginia Supreme Court (1998)

Examples of Tennessee’s threshold standard

In 1993 in a grandparent visitation case the Tennessee Supreme Court held, “we believe that when no substantial harm threatens a child’s welfare, the state lacks a sufficiently compelling justification for the infringement on the fundamental right of parents to raise their children as they see fit.” Hawk v. Hawk Tennessee Supreme Court (1993)

In a 1995 parent vs. third party custody case, “Therefore, in a contest between a parent and a non-parent, a parent cannot be deprived of the custody of a child unless there has been a finding, after notice required by due process, of substantial harm to the child. Only then may a court engage in a “best interest of the child” evaluation in making a determination of custody.” In re Adoption of a Female Child Tennessee Supreme Court (1995)

In a 1999 parental rights termination case, “Therefore Bond stands for the proposition that a natural parent may only be deprived of custody of a child upon a showing of substantial harm to the child.” In re Askew Tennessee (1999)

A July 2001 parental abuse case, “In furtherance of that goal, and in the best interests of Pamela due to a threat of substantial harm, the juvenile court ordered a termination of visitation.” “Although parents’ have a right to raise, care for and have the companionship of their child under both Tennessee and U.S. Constitutions, these rights can be infringed upon if the court finds substantial harm threatens a child’s welfare.” “The court made clear that there must be a threshold finding of harm before the state can intervene in a parent-child relationship; however, once this finding of harm to the child is made, a determination of custody is made based on the “best interest of the child”. This threshold finding of substantial harm was made when Pamela was found by the juvenile court to be abused, dependent, and neglected and removed form the custody of her parents and placed in foster care.” DCS v. Cox Tennessee Appeals Court (2001)

An August 2001 divorced parent v. parent case, “We believe the parents’ constitutional right of privacy as found by our Supreme Court in Hawk is applicable here where we have two fit parents, even if those parents are now divorced. Additionally, we believe the constitutional rights under the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution as well as Article I, Section 26 of the Tennessee Constitution are worthy of the same protection as is the constitutional right to privacy discussed in Hawk. Accordingly, the Trial Court could not restrict Father’s otherwise lawful possession of a firearm absent a showing of risk of substantial harm to the child. The Trial Court made no such finding.” Stillwell v. Stillwell Tennessee Appeals Court (2001) Note: This may be the first and only U.S. case where a harm standard was applied to divorced parents.

A standardized threshold (bright-line rule) is needed

Many threshold terms are in use, and the best seems to be “severe harm”. It has a proper sense of urgency which strikes a balance between too low of threshold terms such as “harm” which implies virtually no barrier, and too high of ones like “serious danger” implying an impossible hurdle. When combined with the designation as a “bright line rule” that cuts cleanly and clearly between the state and parents in all circumstances, a trial judge will have no problem properly applying family law to any circumstance that he or she faces.

The state may not apply the best interest of the child standard nor infringe in the parent-child relationship prior to proving that a child is in severe harm

We too, agree that neither the legislature nor a court may properly intervene in parenting decisions absent significant harm to the child from those decisions. In so holding, we approve the logic of Santosky v. Kramer which applied a two-step process to child neglect cases leading to foster family placement. In Santosky, the Supreme Court approved New York’s bifurcated proceeding requiring the state first to establish paternal unfitness before placing a child in foster care. This procedure assures parents that a “best interest of the child” analysis will not pit them against potential foster parents; rather, the state consider a child’s “best interests” until the natural parents have been declared unfit. Hawk v Hawk Tennessee Supreme Court (1993) Note: In a case where parental rights are infringed to a much lesser degree than in a parent v. parent custody case, the Tennessee Supreme Court clearly states parents must be declared “unfit” prior to “best interests” being applied.

The proof in this case supports the trial court’s finding that the father is not unfit to have custody, and that he has developed a substantial relationship with the child. It shows that the child is in no danger of substantial harm. The father, therefore, has a fundamental interest in parenting the child which precludes a “best interest” determination of custody. Petrosky v. Keene Tennessee Supreme Court (1995)

If the threshold of severe harm is found, any orders issued must be so as no less restrictive remedies can be contemplated

To satisfy strict scrutiny, the State must show that a statute furthers a compelling state interest by the least restrictive means practically available. Bernal v. Fainter United States Supreme Court (1984)

Requiring a State to demonstrate a compelling interest and show that it has adopted the least restrictive means of achieving that interest is the most demanding test known to constitutional law. City of Boerne v. Flores United States Supreme Court (1997)

T.C.A. § 36-6-101(a)(1) “In a suit for annulment, divorce or separate maintenance, where the custody of a minor child or minor children is a question, the court may,.award the care, custody and control of such child or the welfare and interest of the child or children may demand” Note: This is Tennessee’s custody statute for divorcing parents. No harm threshold is present, nor any requirement for narrow tailoring. This statute is facially unconstitutional on two grounds.

A statute must be followed as written

When “the language contained within the four corners of a statute is plain, clear and unambiguous, the duty of the courts is simple and obvious, ‘to say sic lex scripta, and obey it.” Hawks v. City of Westmoreland Tennessee Supreme Court (1997)

Thus, a court must “presume that the legislature says in a statute what it means and means in a statute what it says there.” A statute, therefore, must be construed as it is written. Berryhill v. Rhodes Tennessee Supreme Court (2000)

T.C.A. § 36-6-301 After making an award of custody, the court shall, upon request of the non-custodial parent, grant such rights of visitation as will enable the child and the non-custodial parent to maintain a parent-child relationship. Note: A reasonable definition of the clause “enable the child and the non-custodial parent to maintain a parent-child relationship” is two to three overnights per week. Tennessee courts routinely allow moveaways, long stretches (weeks/months/years) where no parenting occurs, and other restrictions such as every other weekend visitation. All of these circumstances violate their own case law, “the language contained within the four corners of a statute is plain, clear and unambiguous, the duty of the courts is simple and obvious, ‘to say sic lex scripta, and obey it.”, and can be challenged on this basis.

Parental rights are identical between natural parents, without regard to gender or marital status

The Constitution protects “the interest of a parent in the companionship, care, custody, and management of his or her children.” Stanley v. Illinois United States Supreme Court (1972)

“The parent and child relationship extends equally to every child and to every parent, regardless of the marital status of the parents.” Johnson v. Calvert California Supreme Court (1993)

The Nales’ position that this Court in Hawk limited the protection of parental rights to an “intact, nuclear family with fit parents” is untenable. Nale v. Robertson Tennessee Supreme Court (1994)

Parental Alienation

It is clear to this Court that both parents love their children. What concerns this Court most, however, and was apparently a concern to the trial court, is Wife’s blatant attempt to alienate the affections of the children from their father. When loved by both parents, children should be taught to love and respect each parent equally. The reciprocation, in turn, will garner self-respect and a positive self image in the children. The record in this case lends absolutely no reason as to why the children should not be encouraged to respect and love their father. We do not find the record to show that Wife has supported such a healthy relationship between parent and child. Although Wife testified otherwise, her actions speak loud and clear. Varley v. Varley Tennessee Appeals Court (1996)

Effect on the parent-child relationship by being apart

Between parent and child, there is no monster like separateness. It can grow even faster than children, shutting first the heart, then the home, then history. Brooks v. Parkerson Georgia Supreme Court (1995)

Friendly Parent Doctrine

The Court stressed, the parent-child relationship “undeniably warrants deference and, absent a powerful countervailing interest, protection.” Stanley v. Illinois United States Supreme Court (1972)

Custody and visitation arrangements should promote the development of a healthy relationship between children and both their parents. Solima v. Solima Tennessee Appeals Court (1998)

Parent vs. Third Party Custody

Therefore, in a contest between a parent and a non-parent, a parent cannot be deprived of the custody of a child unless there has been a finding, after notice required by due process, of substantial harm to the child. Only then may a court engage in a “best interest of the child” evaluation in making a determination of custody.” In re Adoption of a Female Child Tennessee Supreme Court (1995)

Biological parents have a fundamental liberty interest in the care and custody of their children under both the United States and Tennessee Constitutions. These parental rights are superior to the rights of others and continue without interruption unless a biological parent consents to relinquish them, abandons his or her child, or forfeits his or her parental rights by some conduct that substantially harms the child. O’ Daniel v. Messier Tennessee Appeals Court (1995)

Grandparent/third party visitation

This appeal presents the issue of the constitutionality of Georgia’s “Grandparent Visitation Statute”, OCGA § 19-7-3. We hold that the statute is unconstitutional under both our state and federal constitutions, and reverse the trial court’s order to the contrary. Brooks v. Parkerson Georgia Supreme Court (1995)

Children in state care

Judge Quinones, a Family Court Judge with eight years of experience, described the conditions of detention as follows:

“Then again, Juvenile Center, as much as we might try, is not the most pleasant place in the world. If you put them in detention, you are liable to be exposing these youngsters to all sorts of things. They are liable to be exposed to assault, they are liable to be exposed to sexual assaults. You are taking the risk of putting them together with a youngster that might be much worse than they, possibly might be, and it might have a bad effect in that respect.”

Many other observers of the circumstances of juvenile detention in New York have come to similar conclusions. Schall v. Martin United States Supreme Court (1984)

1st Amendment Protest Guarantees

We have recognized that the First Amendment reflects a “profound national commitment” to the principle that “debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open,” This has led us to scrutinize carefully any restrictions on public issue picketing. Boos v. Barry United States Supreme Court (1988)

The traditional approach sets forth a bright-line rule: any restriction on speech, the application of which turns on the content of the speech, is a content-based restriction regardless of the motivation that lies behind it. Boos v. Barry United States Supreme Court (1988)

Pro-Se litigant’s pleadings

Pro se litigant’s pleadings should not be held to the same high standards of perfection as lawyers. “Significantly, the Haines case involved a pro se complaint – as does the present case – which requires a less stringent reading than one drafted by a lawyer. Puckett v. Cox United States Court of Appeals (1972)

Section 2 Persuasive Arguments

Thus, apart from constitutional problems of using the best interest of the child standard without a prerequisite showing of harm, the vagueness and subjectivity of such a standard lends itself to an invasion of family privacy which is abhorrent to our current society. Kathleen Bean (1985-86) Grandparent Visitation: Can the Parent Refuse? Note: This statement is equally applicable to all invasions of the parent-child relationship.

The bible advises input from both parents; “Hear, my son, your father’s instruction, and reject not your mother’s teaching;” Proverbs 1:8 Revised Standard Version

Hubin, Donald (1999). Parental Rights and Due Process. University of Utah Journal of Law & Family Studies Volume 1 Number 2, 123-150. Note: The best article on unconstitutionality of family law.

See at: RDP.PDF

See Childs Best Interest website generally for useful information:

Section 3 Traps

When a legal action is initiated which involves a child, if a parent is not residing in the same home as the child, he or she will presumptively be considered as the non-custodial parent. The only way to avoid this trap is to not leave the home, or allow your child to be taken out of it.

When hiring an attorney, one of the first things they do is request financial information. This is because they are mentally figuring how much wealth they will be able to transfer to themselves.

At the filing of a legal action involving a child, if a temporary injunction is issued to maintain the status quo (keep the child under the care of one parent), the excluded parent will presumptively be considered as non-custodial. Any pre-trial orders which impede your ability to parent your child can be immediately appealed. If you wait for trial, you will waive your right to later raise these issues.

Pre-trial if a parent consents to pay child support, the judge and both attorneys will take this as a signal that he or she agrees to be the non-custodial parent.

Any consent order a parent agrees to (even if it comes after a contested hearing) cannot be appealed. You do not have to “consent” to anything, even if your attorney says otherwise. Remember, attorneys are officers of the court, and quite possibly friends with the judge and opposing attorney. They are required to zealously represent you, and to uphold the constitution. Expect neither.

Normally an investigation of the parents will be done. This can be anything from a college volunteer working for CASA, an attorney called a Guardian Ad Litem, a private investigator, up to a pediatric psychologist. The job of all these folks is to invade the privacy of your relationship with your child, and transfer as much wealth as possible to themselves. Also you will either be encouraged or mandated to attend counseling, to achieve the same goals. Using the above constitutional citations you can object to any invasion of your privacy and your child’s. If you fail to object, you waive your rights.

At trial your attorney can have a pre-trial brief prepared which carefully identifies the applicable laws and how your case applies to those laws (including of course constitutional law). Very few attorneys will do this. Most will present your case with no reference to any laws whatsoever, and simply allow the judge to rule as he or she wishes.

Also at trial both parents are considered to be voluntarily submitting the question of child custody to the court. Your attorney can assert that you do not want custody of your child decided by the state. If you don’t do this, it will be considered waived for appeal purposes, as will any applicable state and constitutional laws not raised by your attorney in his or her oral arguments.

If you ask that the law be followed in your case, expect intimidation tactics such as your attorney threatening to resign, or being told visitation with your child will be reduced. If any of this happens, request a brochure or other method whereby you can file a complaint with your state board of responsibility against the unlawful attorney. To make a complaint call: 1-800-486-5714

If you receive an unfavorable decision at trial, your attorney can file a motion to reconsider, or a notice of appeal. If you are appealing there are strict time limits on this, which if not followed will cause your case to be thrown out. If you consent to anything at trial, it will not be appeallable.

Appeals are usually taken to a state appellate court, then if needed an application is filed to your state supreme court (they may be called another name). The state supreme court has discretion whether to take your case or not, and they probably won’t take it. If your state supreme court does not give you a favorable ruling, you can appeal properly preserved constitutional questions to the United State Supreme Court, which virtually never takes a family law case. Wherever your case finally stops, it will be considered final.

Section 4 Legal Primer

There are three types of law, constitutional, statutory, and case. Constitutional law is primarily what this paper consists of, it is written by the people, and everyone must follow it. Statutory law is created by your state legislature, and the judges and all citizens must follow it as written. Case law is the judge’s interpretation of how constitutional and statutory law apply to individual cases. Most libraries will have copies of your state constitution, and statutory laws.

Solima v. Solima 7 S.W.3d 30, at 33 (Tenn.App.1998)

Being able to read case citations is very important as this enables you to look up and verify the original. In the above example the “style” of the case is Solima v. Solima, and these of course are the two parties at odds.

The next part 7 S.W.3d 30 tells you the original decision is contained in the “SouthWest” reporters. If you are unable to find them yourself, the law school librarian can show you where they are at. 7 is the volume number, 3d means third edition, and 30 is the page the case begins on. The at 33 is the specific page where the quote you are referring to is at, and (Tenn.App.1998) tells you the court that issued the decision and year it did so. If you see a case citation that has only the year listed without any court, such as (2000), that is a decision from the U.S. Supreme Court. NY or Utah would be a state supreme court, U.S.D.C. is a federal court, and U.S.C.A. is a federal appeals court.

If you are starting from scratch and don’t have a case citation, ask the librarian where the “digests” for your state, or the “Corpus Secundum” are. These allow you to start with a subject, such as “constitutional law”, and look up all of the cases cited in that area.


Parental rights consist of fundamental liberty and privacy interest, which the state can only infringe upon after finding a child is in severe harm, or severe danger of being harmed. You must properly assert your rights at every stage of litigation, or forever waive them, and your ability to parent your child.

As a final note constitutional rights in general, and parental rights in particular, are being regularly eroded. Amendments to the U.S. and state Constitutions must be enacted to reverse this.

Daniel Lee ACFC Associate Director

© Copyright Daniel Lee 2001 CBI Home: ACFC Home:

 Children Need BOTH Parents!

The American Coalition for Fathers and Children

For Membership information call 1-800-978-DADS or see ACFC’s homepages at:

To subscribe send a message to: Message in subject line: subscribe acfc

To unsubscribe send a message to: Message in subject line: unsubscribe acfc

The ACFC List Serve provides timely information to fathers, second wives, and others seeking restoration of fatherhood in America and the world. ACFC does not endorse or approve the views or opinions expressed by contributors, which have been provided only as a service to our list serve subscribers.

18 thoughts on “Constitutional Law Summary for Parents (MAKE CPS COURTS FOLLOW THE LAW)

  1. Pingback: Constitutional Law Summary for Parents (MAKE CPS COURTS FOLLOW THE LAW) | Family Rights Project

  2. Very Important: Please check to make sure your child is Covered with ‘Health Care’ Insurance while in the Custody of CPS I have been getting reports that some agencies are failing to provide Insurance to those they take away..That may be a key battle in fighting CPS, and could generate many lawsuits…One family is already suing as thier child was turned down for medical while in the care of CPS…


    • Even if you have insurance when the state takes your child, the state has to cover the child by law. They become responsible for the health and welfare, although I don’t know what good it does if everyone has immunity from prosecution how the hell are they responsible for anything. To me that makes them irresponsible but we already knew that. They should have to step up to the plate like parents, instead of hiding in the shadows and pretending they are there for the child’s best interest. When is holding the child for federal funding ever been in any child’s best anything?


  3. You can certainly see your expertise within the article you write.
    The sector hopes for even more passionate writers like you who aren’t afraid to mention how they believe. All the time go after your heart.


  4. Pingback: Nebraska’s grandparent visitation statutes

  5. I just want to mention I am just all new to weblog and honestly savored you’re web page. More than likely I’m going to bookmark your blog post . You amazingly come with good stories. With thanks for revealing your web site.


  6. Hello! I just wish to give an enormous thumbs up for the great info you might have correct here on this post. I can be coming once more to your blog for much more soon. 869902


  7. It’s hard to find your page in google. I found it
    on 19 spot, you should build quality backlinks , it will help you to rank to google top 10.
    I know how to help you, just type in google – k2
    seo tricks


    • No, if you Google “corrupt Juvenile Dependency” or “Donnelly Burns”, or “CPS Stealing children”, or “Southwest Justice Center court cohorts” or just “court cohorts” or “cps falsified documents” or any number of other things we will be all three top results. We are also CPS:child predator services and “Self-Help Site Donnellyjustice”. Just sayin’. We use many tags and we have a good readership. But thanks.


  8. I live in ohio we need to all come together in all states we have to stop cps / family court we need good strong organization n all states a lot of parents / families are in need of help we can not keep being scared of cps we have to keep fighting for all of our innocent children I will like to get a organization started here in ohio I would like for people here in my state to contact me I know cps / family court is very hard to deal with a lot of parents / families are in need of a lot of help / support join me & my family / friends in our fight to help bring innocent children home that have been wrongfully taken / put up for wrongful adoption / sale I would like for others in there states to help get a organization started in all 50 states If anyone in ohio would like to help me my e-mail is or anyone can call me my number is 330-249-1541 I would like for people to contact that would like to help me get the organization started WAKE UP ALL UP ALL 50 STATES LET’S ALL JOIN TOGETHER TO HELP BRING INNOCENT CHILDREN HOME SAFE OUT OF FOSTER CARE HOME TO THERE LOVING PARENTS / FAMILIES LET’S STOP CPSSSSSSSSSS


  9. I need help cps took my baby boy from me on 12/16/14 to it is 2/15/15 he is still in cps care. the next court date is trail. is that it is that the last court thing. see I have a long past with cps the keep taking my kids from me and don’t give them back. things are different here I had my son for 8 months be4 they took him from me. I live in oakdale ca. I am a very good mother. someone called cps on me and told them lies, as soon as cps find out I had a past they took my son from me. I get to see him once a week for 2 hours. it brakes my heart. I have a paid lawyer. I am parying and hoping after the trail he will be back home with me. when I get to see him he has bad diaper rash, I would never let him get diaper rash like that. it make me mad. is there any one on here that can help me or tell me what I can do??? to get my son back home with me??? see what I hate is the judge leaves everthing up to cps they don’t wont me to have my son, they wont to adopet him out. m


    • Hey Shanna I’m going through something similar, yea the foster mom wants to adopt my daughter and cps is in her corner, after making myself known to my daughter’s worker they totally refused to acknowledge me as a father stepping up to the plate to take on my full resposibility to my daughter. …I c now it’s all about making money for themselves when the economy gose low they steel more kids to save there jobs…but by prayer we will prevail!!!!!


  10. The constitutional right I am wondering about is my 2 constitutional right. CPS took our children stating imminent harm for weapons. Though they went through house twice stating no weapons present. They now demand we sell ALL OUR GUNS to get our children back and sign stating we will NEVER OWN A GUN AGAIN. We have two gun safes that only my husband has access too. Now standing completely empty. How is this possible.. we were collectors. How


    • I would be contacting a lawyer. Email me and I have a lot of great information I can pass on to you to help prevent CPS from continuing to do this stuff to us families that are actually great parents. They continue to violate or Constitutional Rights and I had enough! Email me at and I can send you some helpful links!


  11. I am in England, going through the exact same thing with the Family Courts over here.
    Children can be removed without any evidence of actual harm, social workers using hearsay and deformation techniques on unsuspecting parents, who have normally come under their radar due to poverty, or family difficulties.
    My son was kidnapped in 2005, by Lambeth/London Social services.
    They used ‘POSSIBLE RISK OF FUTURE EMOTIONAL NEGLECT’ to secure an adoption.
    I managed to get post adoption contact since 2011, yet this has broken down, after I was assaulted by the adopters natural son. Since the police were notified, my contact has been stopped. I am now desperately seeking support to have my contact reestablished, and have the poor parenting, and violence monitored in my sons adoptive home. The social services have offered no advice or help since the adoption, and no one has even checked up on the adoptive home, to check if everything is okay, and everyone is getting along. Just because a child is taken from a mother/father/family, for possible risks, the fact that they have not even happened yet, would be a clear indicator, that there are just as many possible risks for children in authority care or adoptive homes, if not more than there would have been, within the natural family.

    These middle men, who pretend to be there to protect our rights and see justice served, have become nothing more than predators processing us through their courts for alternative agendas.

    I am not anti…system….I would like to see the system I was told was practicing…to protect and serve. At this rate, the authoritarian reputation will become so divided/deluded/detached we might as well all be different species of human being.

    Social workers are supposed to help and guide families…along the right path…not steal your children for profit, and dump you on the forgotten pile!

    ( thoughts to all those of you who have had to learn the hard way, what our systems really stand for, and its not US!)


  12. My child’s father tried to make cps take our daughter from me by telling cps I shook her they found no evidence of that. I told them he’s trying to punish me for leaving him when I found out about his method use. So they drug tested us both because I use pot oils for pain I haven’t gotten a new card because I didn’t have the money. So I don’t breastfeed and haven’t been using as they asked it’s been two monthseparate and a week ago they told me I can’t have a beer before I go to bed and if I do they will take her from me. They started testing me for alcohol on the 12th of last month if they wanted me not to drink they should have said so to begin with. Her father lied and cheats his drug tests but two weeks ago was arrested for a felony dui and felony drug charges so now they know not only did he lie about her being shaken but also about his drug use. I want cps out of my life I have six kids and have never hurt them iv been compliant with them but all they are doing is adding more and more things I have to do and it’s interfearing with my life how do I make them leave me alone?


  13. PLEASE Somebody give me advice…
    My story is so off the wall crazy why my children were taken. It’s hard to find a place to start.
    My husband was murdered in a home invasion 01/09. By a close friend which was very traumatizing for myself and our two children. 4/2011
    two years of murder trials for four diff men. I was main witness.
    I went to the house on my in laws property. where I lived for 14 years and is still on my drivers license to this day as my address.
    I took two things that belonged to myself and my husband. I was arrested and kids taken on a residential burglary charge OF MY OWN HOUSE..
    Now husband gone, Kids Gone, I was doing everything they said to get them back
    SOOO much more to story but heres how it ends.
    10/13 Going to court thinking Soon as im done in 32 days with what they had me doing. Kids would be returned.
    When we get there. Im told my kids will be going to WA to fathers side of family for 29 days. Judge ORDERS them to be returned to CA on 29th day.
    On 28th day. We go back to court. New judge and I’m told kids will be staying in WA. I lose guardianship.
    WHY…. Because during my husbands murder trial before they started the first day. jurors there courtroom full. Judge finds out I have children.
    They stop the trail that day. Say the records of my testimony that im getting immunity on NOW because of the kids. The records will be sealed.

    Now back to CPS court date kids should be returned in 3 days. A supervisor in CPS steps in.
    and saying. If he cant read the transcripts of the murder trials. He will distance my kids as far away from me as poss. Because he think i had something more to do with there dads death then they know…
    NOT THE CASE. I didnt care if he read them.. But NOPE they took them.

    I walked out of court that day not remembering much of anything and ended up 18 miles away that night.
    My thoughts were only of how I would end my life now that I had nothing left. How I would do it. Where and what I would write to my kids to say goodbye…
    I had never had anything or been around anything or known anybody who had been threw anything like this in my life. I listened to my attorneys and CPS Judges thinking they were helping me.
    My residential burglary charge dropped, My struggles threw the depression of my husband death, reliving the day he died on a witness stand over and over for two years and taking my son to therapy week after week over coming the death of his father. Now ended up with severe anxiety about my welfare.
    ALL taken from me..
    By the grace of God, I found myself in a small town 20 miles outside of where this took place.
    I found people that loved me and gave me hope. I got a job that I worked at for 2 1/2 years.
    I found myself and a reason to live again.
    I found out that what happened to me was wrong. I was misguided and used and had nobody left but myself and the people who where supposed to be helping me. I didnt have a good attorney helping me with my cps case I had a friend of the children’s attorney and cps attorney who BBQed on weekend together. She never objected to anything She never spoke out or even asked why. besides to say I dont know why there doing this.
    Now that Im Awake and see and have support.
    They say I cant do anything about it the statute of limitations has run out. I only had two years to file a lawsuit or do anything.
    Can anybody help me understand. Nobody told me I only had two years. Nobody told me that the law for me signing those papers to protect my kids. Could back fire and just be overlooked.
    Two years after what I went threw. Is that still grieving period especially when your whole world is ripped away by one man who THINKS he knows something but is wrong.
    It does not seem fare when My sons Therapist of two years and his third. fourth grade teachers and schools secretary and my neighbors write letters saying this is crazy.
    I was an amazing stay at home mom who wanted a baby so bad I went to a fertility doctor. I was very involved in my sons school activities and volunteering in the classroom as noted by all his teachers. I just recently found out about how many people came forward on my behalf and wrote letters. I had NO IDEA.
    Yesterday the attorney I had been talking with about this told me . That the statute of limitations has ran out…
    There has got to be somebody that can give me advice. Can I file something against the man Jerry Allen that took them spontaneously because he cldnt read the transcripts.
    How can they say sign these so your kids are safe then take them cause they cant read them.
    So those Laws mean nothing.
    How was I supposed to know all this.
    Please somebody help me. Cause I dont want to start going backwards.
    There is so much more wrong with this. I just tried to be brief..


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s