Justice In Texas

The Texas Supreme Court has just shown what justice looks like:

The Texas Supreme Court has ruled that the removal of FLDS children from the YFZ Ranch was unwarranted — and the decision to take them was an abuse of judicial discretion. . . .

In its ruling, the high court said that state law gave the lower court broad authority to protect children “short of separating them from their parents and placing them in foster care,” including removing alleged perpetrators from a child’s home and preventing the removal of a child from the jurisdiction of the investigating agency. (emphasis added)

One of the hard things in opposing the actions of CPS is trying to illuminate the distinction between protecting the children and ignoring the rule of law. Unfortunately it is all to easy for an agency like CPS to abuse the power that is placed in their hands and in many cases where that happens it is also very easy for the courts to side with the professional and well organized government agency while discounting the plea’s of the distraught and disorganized parents. Naturally in a case as large as this the parents were not so disorganized as they often are when it is a single family – or even a single parent – trying to challenge the government agency.

The important thing right now is that the Texas Supreme Court got it right in saying that CPS overstepped their bounds but that they are still allowed to investigate allegations of abuse and take less drastic steps to protect the children.

About David

David is the father of 8 extremely organized children (4 girls / 4 boys) who is constantly seeking answers to tough questions related to parenting, education and politics while moonlighting for 40 hours each week as a technology professional. He also enjoys cooking, gardening, and sports.

This entry was posted in politics, State and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Comments

2 Responses to Justice In Texas

  1. Carl says:

    http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/05/23/flds.appeals/index.html
    Right or wrong, it does hit on some of the points I had to consider for my Con Law final (which was entirely about the FLDS situation.
    I will admit that the article holds a bias, but I just thought you might like to read it.

  2. David says:

    Thanks for sharing – I will be reading it.

    Did you think it was a good final in Con Law being focused on a current case?

Comments are closed.

Loading Facebook Comments ...