It gets worse.
Yesterday Texas Child Protective Services, was told by the 3rd circuit Court of Appeals that they had no business taking over 450 children away from their families, that there simply wasn’t credible evidence to suggest that the majority of children were in enough danger to justify their removal.
Then today, CPS essentially said to the 3rd Circuit Court that it didn’t care about the court’s pesky opinion, that it was keeping the kids, and was going to the Supreme Court to overturn Thursday’s ruling.
Timothy Lynch, writing for the National Review, has a very thoughtful and informative run down on some of the underlying issues contained in this situation. Plus, he has reports from neutral observers that suggest CPS has repeatedly dealt with the children in ways that cannot help but traumatize them. Here are some clips:
Culture shock is not a crime. Today marriage and child bearing are commonly delayed into one’s 30s, so there was some culture shock when the news broke about a raid on a religious sect where teen pregnancy was reportedly the norm. Texas law-enforcement officials may recoil from such behavior but it cannot send agents out on a whim to enforce a new set of rules. The Mormon splinter group, known as the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (FLDS), moved to Texas precisely because the state’s marriage laws were amenable to their religious beliefs. In 2004, the year FLDS members moved to Eldorado, Texas law allowed girls as young as 14 to marry with the permission of their parents. In 2005, Texas lawmakers heeded the advice of Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff to raise the minimum age that minors with parents’ permission can marry from 14 to 16. Shurtleff had experience dealing with FLDS communities in Utah. Texas also upgraded the penalties for bigamy from a misdemeanor to felony. There is nothing untoward about that — so long as those new laws are applied prospectively.
A Presumption of Guilt. Six weeks have now passed since the April 3 raid on the FLDS ranch and there have been no arrests for child abuse or child rape. The raid was prompted by an anonymous phone call by a lady named “Sarah.” “Sarah” claimed that she was 16, that she lived at the FLDS ranch in Eldorado, that she was forced into a marriage with a much older man by the name of Dale Barlow, that she had one eight-month-old child and that she was pregnant again. Texas CPS executed a search warrant at the ranch but could not find “Sarah” or Dale Barlow. Police now believe that the phone call was a hoax by a woman in Colorado who has a history of submitting false reports. Dale Barlow was found in Arizona. He has been interviewed by investigators, but Texas has chosen not to have Barlow arrested even though they had an arrest warrant for him when the initial raid took place. Texas CPS officials now stress that the seizure of the children is a “civil” matter unrelated to the raid and that the constitutional safeguards that pertain to criminal investigations do not apply. FLDS parents and their appointed lawyers were initially bewildered by the Kafkaesque manner of Texas’s “child removal” proceedings. The presumption of innocence was turned on its head, which means the parents were expected to prove a negative — that they committed no crime. Until yesterday’s ruling, CPS had been able to whimsically thwart any challenge to its authority. Some parents, for example, have tried to present government documentation, such as birth certificates and drivers licenses, to show they have violated no marriage law so that they could retrieve their children. Unacceptable, said CPS. When some mothers sought to meet with their attorneys before police interviews, CPS informed the mothers that if they left the shelter for such an appointment, they would not be able to rejoin their children, which are in CPS custody.
[SNIP]
CPS Mistreatment of the Children. ….Thanks to John Kight, who is chairman of an organization that provided mental health workers to assist CPS care for the mothers and hundreds of children who were moved to shelters, we have some objective eyewitness reports that Kight has released to the press. What these social workers have reported is deeply disturbing. One worker wrote, “On the awful day that they separated the mothers and children the level of cruelty and lack of respect for human rights was overwhelming. Crying, begging children were ripped away from their devastated mothers and the mothers were put on buses to either return to the ranch or to go to shelters. Most went to shelters because they were told they would be able to see their children if they did not return to the ranch. This, of course, was another [CPS] lie.” Another worker observed “one male child, who was about 9 years old, broke away from the rest of the children who were all hurtled together, being comforted by each other, and walked up to a police officer. I heard him say, ‘You’re the police, help us. Help me get my mother back. She has done nothing wrong.’” Another worker concluded her report with this: “Never in all my life, and I am one of the older ladies, have I been so ashamed of being a Texan…”
Talk about trauma by seizing kids. Where was the liberal outrage then?
Isn’t it nice that government can demand that citizens obey the laws while it does what it wants. Government workers should be held PERSONALLY accountable for acts that they perform as government employees when those acts are clearly in defiance of the law and justice. (That would also put a lot of IRS employees out of work.)
God forbid a boy should be reunited with his father.
…even at the point of an assault weapon by a goon squad busting down the door, screaming threats and curses to grab a scared and confused boy who was with family giving him love and care, just so the boy could be forced to live under Casto’s dictatorship in which his father was threatened to demand him back rather than let him enjoy freedom. Yeah, that’s a whole lot better than the CPS. It takes a liberal.
in which his father was threatened to demand him back
Yet again, proof?
It takes a liberal.
Like Steve Largent and two thirds of the American public.
Woody frequently writes about obeying the law. A judge had rejected the family’s asylum application for Elian as they had no standing to make such an application. The Supreme Court refused to hear their appeal.
The family repeatedly disobeyed the law. I guess the laws are only to be obeyed when you agree with them, Woody.
Just for the record, if Juan Gonzalez was threatened if he didn’t demand his son back, why then did he not take his opportunity to defect in the two months he was in the US?
Randy, Juan had other family members in Cuba who would suffer retribution at the hands of Castro if Juan didn’t cooperate. Those “good” jobs and security they could have…gone. You’re such an idiot.
Since you love the way Elian was treated, I guess there isn’t any outrage for those Texas children illegally taken from their parents.
It’s a great website of yours. I surfed by and found it very informative. Bookmarked and check you back in a while