THE JUVENILE COURT SCAM

Juvenile Court Scam




THE JUVENILE COURT SCAM

http://www.beatcpsnow.com/gpage1.html

Some might think that this cannot be possible. Our legal system is the greatest in the world. Wrong! It was at one time but in the last 20 years it has become corrupt and beyond repair and is nothing more than a band of lawless criminals plundering the people. First, it is important to understand that our legal system is all about civil law or the law of the contract. Secondly, it is important to know that our courts no longer operate with any judicial authority. This makes all of our courts nothing more than private commercial corporations hiding behind a judicial false front. They look like counts, they act like courts but they are in reality only an act to make us think they are a judicial court with power to get as much money out of the people as possible. If you do not believe this go to Dunn and Bradstreet and look up your superior court and find that it is a commercial corporation. Thirdly, the only way these fraudulent commercial courts can function is if they can get you to consent to their contracts. These Admiralty contracts result from color of law fraudulent laws that they trick you into believing you have to obey when in fact all these laws are unconstitutional and mean nothing unless you agree to them. I bet they never taught you that in school. Our schools teach us to obey the law and not to question authority. Americans are sheeple and asleep and have no idea what their rights are and just obey the government and authority no matter what they do. Steal children, if the government does it, it must be OK. In fact, many people become informants and turn in families because they do not like the way they are raising their children. The local governments loves this Nazi informant mentality because the more kids they can sell the more money they make. They do not care if the child was injured or abused. If they get a complaint if it is legitimate or not that is good enough for them. They take the child and start their scam against the parents and could care less about the law, fairness and justice. Why? Because they are criminals involved with in a criminal conspiracy between the courts, the county and the state to plunder the people.

The superior courts are courts of consent but they usually follow some form of judicial procedure where due process is involved. This is done so it appears to be a court when in reality they just want you to agree with their contract and know if they deny you the appearance of your constitutional rights you will fight back. In a court of consent you have no rights except to not to consent. The rest is all show by the court and the judge to keep you from seeing the truth. Remember, if you do not consent they have no power as they have no contract! If they keep harassing you file a federal complaint against them for trespassing on your rights and kidnapping.
It is important to note that when the law applies to people against people or corporations against corporations the courts function fairly close to what they are supposed to do. Of course there is corruption but nothing like what happens when the courts get involved with the government.

When the government involves the courts the law takes on an entirely different operation and function which is not only corrupt but unconstitutional the way it has evolved. It is called criminal law but is really just civil law as all law is civil. The name criminal is used to name the system of plunder and label anyone the government wants to discredit because you are charged with some crime. Of course there are criminal who trespass on individual rights and need to be brought to justice. This is where the government has overstepped their bounds. Just because there are legitimate criminals and crimes does not mean that everyone the government labels as a criminal or who has broken some bogus color of law fraud is a criminal. There is not a person in America who is not a criminal and breaking some law as there are so many bogus law imposed upon us by the system. It is out of control.

Most crimes now a days are against the “state”. Keep in the mind that the “state” used to be our government but is now private commercial for profit corporations called the county or the state. This is illegal and a scam as the law requires a real party of interest to appear to prove that there has been an injury. That means a real person to which the injury occurred. When the supposed injured party is the state, a public defender shows up who is not the real party in interest and represent the “state”. Why is there no real party in interest, because no one was injured? He cannot be the real party in interest as the injury did not happen to him. Is this legal, no but they do it all the time because we let them get away with it like everything else they do. The government and the courts in criminal law become a criminal conspiracy to plunder the people for profit.

Why does this happen? It would take a book to discuss what is really happening here but in a nut shell when the government is involved with the law we are really dealing with a private for profit corporation making lots of money off all the color of law frauds they can entrap the people with. This creates a total unfair situation where the private commercial courts pretending to be legitimate judicial courts of law are making money off of everyone they can get their hooks into by conning them into to consenting to their “charges”. Notice that they use the word charges meaning the cost of the crime you supposedly committed. Remember all law is civil. The charge being the cost to repair the damage you supposedly caused. They then divide this by an hourly rate and that becomes the length of time they incarcerate you. Money has become their only real motivation and justice and fairness is totally gone.
With CPS it is a business, a criminal enterprise, that steals children to obtain money from the feds for adoptions and selling children on the private market place. They are also using the child’s birth certificate bond until the child is 18 years old to make even more money by using the bonds for collateral for investing in the financial markets making millions off of other peoples money with no risk. If you wonder where all this money goes, as the governments are claiming that they are all bankrupt, go look up CAFR funds and you will see how well these criminals hiding behind the government are doing. In other words, the criminals have stashed all this money they have not siphoned off in CAFR funds that the legitimate government of the people cannot get access to.
Juvenile court is in reality not even a court at all. It would be more like an inquisition. The juvenile court has no due process, no fair trial, no jury trials, not judicial power, it is usually held in secret, it usually does not use process of service and service of process, no rules of evidence are practiced and is in reality a total fraudulent concealment. Of course CPS will say that this is wrong the Juvenile is a fair court. However, the Juvenile court is run by CPS and the county council using smoke and mirrors tricks to eliminate any fairness that might have once been there. The judge is really an actor just there to make it look like a court and occasionally makes an order that CPS wants. The following are some of the frauds, tricks and deceptions that CPS and this inquisition uses to strip you of your rights and your children all without you knowing it and completely denying you your due process rights.

1. Juvenile court is really a tribunal of consent. Do not consent to anything. Demand your children back and stick to it and consent to nothing. In reality, it does not matter what evidence they have against you. The laws they are charging you with breaking are frauds in the first place and unless you consent to them they have no power over you as they have no contract and will have to let you and your children go. They will do everything they can to trap you and get you to consent but if you do not consent they will eventually have to drop the matter.

2. When CPS serves you with something like a hearing notice, it is usually not stamped by the court and comes directly from the CPS case worker. This is in reality not process of service and you do not have to appear. To be legal, if you are served, it needs to be from the court clerk and stamped by the court. No stamp no service. CPS is so sure you do not know your rights they do not even take the time to serve anything properly as they know that the sheeple will just show up. Show up any way but do plead and do not consent to anything and demand your children back. If you are in a CPS case use the hearings as a forum to rescind your signature, serve federal complaints, etc. NOTE: If you do not have a contract with CPS yet or have rescinded you signature and consent and fired your attorney, never go beyond the bar . Always sit in the front row behind the bar. WHY? If you cross the bar you are in their jurisdiction. If they ask you to sit in the well of court (past the bar) politely decline and just say that you do not consent to sitting there. Even if the judge threatens to hold you in contempt for not sitting beyond the bar, just say you do not consent and do not do it. Always hold your ground.

3. Juvenile hearings are held behind closed doors and exclude the family and friends. This of course is to protect the children. Right! It is done so they there are no witnesses to the frauds that they are committing. So in court there is one parent, their attorney (who is working with CPS) a CASA worker (another CPS informant), the child’s attorney (CPS co-conspirator) father’s attorney, county council and usually other CPS people. That makes about 6 to 8 against one traumatized parent with no witnesses. Boy that sounds really fair. Before each hearing all the attorneys go into the court without the parent and decide what game they are going to play today and who is going to be the good guy and who is going to be the bad gut. It is a set up to get the parent to agree with what they want signed at the hearing to continue.

4. One of the main scams is for the county council or the child’s council to make false allegations against you in court. It is like a tag team match. Your attorney will usually just sit there and not respond. If he does respond he will not rebut the lies and say something like we will set this for trial. In the meantime, because he did not rebut the lies, they are entered into court as facts because they were not rebutted. Yes the matter could be set for trial but they just rolled you over into another contract ending the last one. This allows CPS to enter all the un-rebutted lies as facts on the record plus their case plan and statues report which are also full of lies are entered into the record. Nothing of yours was entered into the record and the old contract was closed with you being found guilty of things you never did without a trial. There was no trial, there was no due process and hearsay evidence and pure lies were entered into the record without meeting any legal requirements of evidence or even having a trial. How did they do that? They tricked you into agreeing with it all. You thought you were agreeing to a trial or a case plan where they said they would give your child back but in reality you also agreed with the un-rebutted lies, the statues report and case plan with even more lies making you guilty of everything. They just got away with getting lies into the record because you unknowingly consented with it. That is the key to their scam: tricking you into consenting to their kidnapping your children and lying about you until they are gone.

5. Did your attorney help you understand this or avoid this trap? No, he not only helped CPS set the trap up but he walked you right into it and shut the door behind you. If you have a court appointed attorney or a private attorney this is what their job is in the juvenile court scam. After all, they are officers of the court. They represent you but who do they work for and what is their job? They are officers of the court. Their job is to essentially guide (represent) you into the trap the quickest and less messy way possible and you pay them for this. I guess you better ask more questions next time on what they are doing for you even though it would do no good as they would only deceive you as to what they are really doing. The legal system has become nothing more than a monopoly and a secrete combination that is all about the money and they will do anything they can to keep you from catching on to their scam and license to steal. NOTE: If you hire an attorney your are declaring to the court that you are incompetent to handle your own affairs. What does that tell you?

6. None of the CPS case plans or status reports are signed by CPS workers under the penalty of perjury making them all hearsay and inadmissible as evidence. This allows the CPS works to lie their faces off and get away with it because they are not signing that they are true. This gives the criminal CPS employees plausible deniability or the government employees get out of jail free card. However, as discussed above CPS gets these lies into court without a trial and without due process because they fraudulently trick you into agreeing with them.

7. The Juvenile court scam also uses time to their advantage while torturing you and your children. They will always say that we have to do things quickly as it is in the best interest of the children. This is a lie and part of their false front of concern. In reality they stall off as long as they can, 18 to 24 months. The first reason they do this is to try and torture and split up parents you so you will eventually break down. If this happens, which is does in many cases, they can say I told you so and you are an unfit parent and they take your children away. It is like the icing on the cake for them if you break down as it proves, in their sick minds, that they were right. The second reason they take so long is that at every hearing they are closing one contract and creating a new one (rolling you over). This is a slow process of stealing a few rights at every hearing until after 6 to 10 hearings or more they have stolen all your rights and your children. If they tried to do this too fast, parents would get wise to their fraud and rebel against CPS. The third reason they want to delay as long as they can is to break your bonds with your children and let your children bond with strangers. How sick is this? But that is exactly what they do. In the CPS handbook it states that a child out of the home for over 4 months is adoptable because the bonds to the parent have been broken and the child will stay with the strangers. I ask you again, how sick are these people?!!!

8. If you try and work with CPS you will run into the communication two step. Meaning that CPS will not return calls, not respond, not set up providers, etc. You will call and email and nothing happens, until the next hearing when CPS suddenly pops up a day before with a brand new case plan and status report full of lies and blames you for not completing your case plan or contacting them. In reality, they never gave you the information and blamed you for it. This happens at every hearing. The best way to deal with this is to get out of your contract with them. However, if you are dealing with them you need to log and record everything, phone calls, emails, letters, appointments, etc. You have to do this to nail them down. If you do not have proof of them not responding and you responding they will just lie about it. That is the type of people you are dealing with. If you ask them question like; I have completed my case plan is there anything else I need to do before the next hearing? The CPS response in their status report is something like; “parent has failed to take responsibility for her actions by asking if she had anything else to do in her case plan”. What does that mean? Any normal person would look at that as if you are taking responsibility for your actions by making sure there is nothing left to do or finding out if CPS forgot to tell you about something (which is common practice). CPS twists a positive comment making the parent into a bad person trying to shirk her responsibility. This is typical of the frauds and tricks that CPS constantly does throughout their 24 months of torture. This is very frustrating as you never get a chance to get the truth out due to their scam. This is another reason you cannot work with CPS and will not get your children back by trying to work with them. Never trust anything CPS says or does. They are liars and evil psychopaths capable of doing anything to get their way and make more money, even torture of children and destroy families and they think they are right
.
9. NOTE: Be prepared that when you do not consent and do not plead into their jurisdiction the court and CPS will do everything they can to make you feel and crazy to try and get your consent. They will never admit that they do not have any judicial authority and have to get your consent to have any power over you. They will call you insane and that you have to obey the law and if you do not you are a criminal and they will threaten and sometimes even throw you in jail. They will pound on you to break you down in every way they can. Hold your ground. Even if they throw you in jail you will be out soon as they cannot hold you unless they agree. If force does not work to break you down, they will suddenly become your friend. They do this to try and get your confidence so they can get you to consent. They will say things like, if you sign this form you will get your children back. This is a lie. Do not sign!!! You do not have sign anything as they have nothing on you and you own them nothing. They will have to let you and your children go as long as you do not contract with them. Once again, do not consent to anything. You own them nothing. In fact they are kidnappers and trespassing on your rights until they can get you to consent. Threaten to file a criminal complaint with the Federal court for trespassing and kidnapping if they do not give your children back ASAP!!!

10. NOTE, if you have an attorney read this, he will reject most everything discussed here. Why? Because they are part of the criminal conspiracy, many do not even know it, as they are officers of the court and have been trained that this is the law and you must obey it. Attorneys, or” legal criminals” as I like to call them, are a major part of the problem of why the legal system is so corrupt today. Most of them are in constant rebellion to the constitution and do not care about it. Many judges will tell you that the constitution has no place in their court. Why? Because it does not have a place in a commercial corporate court of consent in the land of fiction and contracts called our court system. The only thing that counts is the contract and your consent. No consent, no contract no nothing.

11. NOTE: You cannot fight CPS in court and win playing their game. You have to get out of the box (trap) by canceling the contract by rescinding your signature and consent and filing a federal complaint against the county and the court. Once the CPS contract is terminated you have a good chance until then you are fighting an uphill battle that will probably destroy you and your family.

12. NOTE: If there are two parents in a family CPS will try and split you up. You need to work together to fight CPS. At the first hearing do not consent. If they get you in their trap they will break up the parents and get them fighting. CPS knows that this is a sure way for CPS to win. Stop CPS in their tracking at the first hearing before there is a contract or you will have a very difficult time fighting CPS. Your marriage and your kids are at stake!

13. NOTE: If you have grandparents that are on your side use them to help you. You will not have to use them if you do not go into the CPS trap from the beginning. If you are tricked into their trap grandparents can be very helpful fighting CPS. What they can do will not be covered here.

14. NOTE: At the first hearing do not prepare your case to try and rebut the CPS allegations against you. By doing this, you are agreeing with their actions. Do not use an attorney. Do this Pro Se, Yourself. Do not cross the bar. Stay in front of the bar an do not cross the bar. Your entire presentation is that you are a natural man or woman and they have no jurisdiction and the charges against you must be dismissed now. Then say you do not consent to the CPS kidnapping of my children and this hearing and want them returned immediately. One of the CPS attorneys will start rattling off all the false allegations against you that can. You just say no I do not agree and I do not consent to this kidnapping and want my children returned now. If the judge ask you questions, like do you want an attorney, just say you do not consent to anything including this hearing and will not be part of it. Do this 20 times if you have to. If they want you to agree to another hearing date just say no. If they ask you to plead, say the same thing: You do not have jurisdiction and I do not consent to your kidnapping my children and want them back now. If they set another hearing date, just say the same thing. I do not agree. If they do set a hearing date without your agreement file a federal complaint for kidnapping and trespassing on your rights and serve it on them at the next hearing. Watch out for tricks to get you to agree; like just sign this document and your children will be home soon. Just go see one doctor and you can get your children back. DO NOT FALL FOR THESE TRICKS. THEY ARE LIES AND YOU WILL LOSE YOUR CHILDREN AND GO THROUGH HELL IN THE PROCESS!!!! Make sure you have witnesses in the court and have them each write up an affidavit of truth stating what happened in court and that you did not agree or consent to anything. You do not have to sign anything to get out of their scam. Just say I do not consent and will not sign anything! You have the power and are going to have to act like it. Polite but direct and to the point, no nonsense- I do not consent!

The Truth About CPS

The Truth About CPS

http://www.beatcpsnow.com/gpage.html

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY CALLED CPS AND THE JUVENILE COURT
The CPS story is very hard to believe for most people who do not have any experience with CPS. In fact, it is so hard to believe that most people won’t believe it and will instead believe that there is something wrong with you not CPS. Most people who have heard of CPS believe that they protect children and are doing good. You will find that when you try to tell your friends and family about CPS taking your children they will have a hard time believing you and will think it is your problem and what did you do wrong. They may never realize that 95% of the children taken by CPS have suffered no abuse or injury of any kind and are in no danger in any way except from CPS. In fact, CPS is the greatest abuser of children in the entire world and children have 6 times more chance of dying in foster care than in their own home no matter how abusive it may be. CPS gets away with murder and stealing children for the money because Americans have been brained washed to not question authority and believe that whatever the government does it must be right. It is all just too incomprehensible for them to believe that our own government is that corrupt and would do such a terrible thing as kidnap children for money. That just can’t be. That is something only criminals would do. They are right, that is something only criminal would do. What they fail to realize or won’t realize is that our government is now home to the criminals who are in control and corruption exists everywhere especially in CPS and the Juvenile court. Even when you are involved with CPS stealing your children it will take months for you to realize the extent of their corruption unless you get the facts now and save yourself major problems and heart ache by falling for their fraud and child stealing scam.
If you have the misfortune to be involved with CPS this is critical information that you need to know about CPS to have any chance of surviving. CPS and the juvenile court system are not what they appear or pretend to be. They are a criminal conspiracy to steal your children for the money and everything they do is to accomplish that. The following is what they really are and how they really steal your children for money and why it is so hard to see their scam until it is too late. It is all about the money and their smoke and mirrors tricks and frauds to steal your rights and your children!

1) The first thing you need to know is that CPS and the juvenile court is a criminal conspiracy to steal children for the money. Do not be fooled into believing that they actually care about you or your children or you. They do not! It is all about the money. It is all about the money. Did you get than? It is all about the money. One of CPS’s main deceptions is that they care. They con you into believing that they are here to help you and your children with your problems. Do not be fooled by this act. They are lying to get information from you to use against you. Do not say anything to them. Tell them to right down all their questions and you will respond. Any and everything you say to them will be used against you. This is a fact and they will twist everything you say to make you look as bad as they can. For example. Your story= I take sleeping medication because I have a hard time sleeping. CPS story= you are a drug addict and are out of control and need sleeping medications so you can sleep after your drug binges. Your story= I see a counselor because sometimes the children are overwhelming. CPS story= you are mentally ill and cannot take care of your children and are seeing a counselor because you are guilty and are an unfit mother. This is not joke. This is exactly what CPS does and they will twist whatever you say into false allegations against you. The reason they do this is that they know they can get these lies into the juvenile court as facts and find you guilty of whatever they make up and you will not even know it until it is too late and you will unknowingly agree to it all.

2) One of the biggest CPS scams is to hold a carrot out in front of you to get you to go their way and do what they want you to do. Then when you think you have completed you your case plan they will change the plan and leave you hanging. Then they will come back with a new case plan and dangle the carrot in front of you again. This happens over and over again. The carrot being getting your child back. They are exploiting your hope that you will get your child back because you are a good parent and never abused your child and fairness will prevail. Right? Wrong!!! Fairness with CPS does not exist. In fact, CPS used your sense of fairness and hope against you to keep you believing that you will get your child back when in fact their job is to trick you so they can take your child for the money. They will tell you that if you do what they tell you, you will get your child back. This is a lie to get you to agree with them and sign away your rights as you keep going down the path of destruction. They will keep doing this at every hearing until they completely take away all your rights without you even knowing it and they got you to consent to all of it.

3) What are they really doing? The entire juvenile court system is a series of traps to burry you deeper into the fraud each time until you have voluntarily given up all your rights and lose your children. It is all about private contracts that you consented to voluntarily. During this process CPS literally tortures you to the point of braking. By the way, this is their goal. They want you to break and time everything to create as much stress as possible. Very few people can last 18 months or 2 years with their children being stolen from them and constantly being accused of false lies without breaking. Of course, as soon as you break CPS is happy to declare that they were right and you are mentally ill and not a good parent and take your children permanently. Of course the court agrees because it is part of the conspiracy to steal your children for money. You have to realize that for the people who work for CPS to become this cruel and evil they are trained psychopaths who can pretend to be your best friend while slowing stabbing you in the back to cause as much pain as possible. Then when they torture you to the breaking point they will then take your parental rights and blame it on you. How sick can it get! They are pure evil and despicable sub humans. This is Natizism at its highest. CPS is a criminal organization do not forget this fact.

4) The courts part in this scam is to roll you over at each hearing. What does that mean? It means that CPS and the court have to haul you into court on a legal time line, usually 45 days plus a few days for filing to keep the case going. That is to get you to agree again with them. The CPS process is one case but a series of individual contract called the case plan and status report. At the end of one contract and the beginning of another there is a hearing where they roll you over into the next contract. When they do this all the false information and lies CPS has entered into court become facts and truth on the record by your own agreement. The judge will also make a few judgments and orders against you at that time. This is called a discontinuance of the evidence. That means that all the evidence you have is lost as you never got a chance to enter it into the record and all the false allegations that CPS fabricated are now facts in the court and are considered true and you are judged guilty accordingly but never even knew it. In other words, the hearing is really a one sided trial that you did not even know was a trail where CPS got all their lies into court as facts and the judge ruled in favor of them because you did not present any facts to rebut their lies. Is this a fair trial? No!! It is a scam!!! Did your attorney tell you about this? No!! Because he is part to the scam. How they trick you into this will be discussed next. To stop this you would have to not agree with their case plan and set every hearing for trial to allow the truth and your side to get into evidence. Even then, the judge is part of the criminal conspiracy and is making money himself off of the kidnapping and will probably rule in their favor anyway. Remember this whole thing is a trap that is almost impossible to get out of.

5) During the hearing (hidden trial) what CPS does to trick you into agreeing to not only their new case plan but to all their lies and false acquisitions entered into court (remember they are also rolling you over) is to again hold the carrot over your head. They say that if you agree with them and the new case plan you will get your child back. The case plan is also a diversion to keep you from seeing what fraud is really going on. CPS gives you all sorts of hoops to jump through in your case plan so you do not have time to think about the fraud they are perpetrating against you. Of course, you would do anything to get your child back and so you agree with them. By agreeing with them you voluntarily (unknowingly) agreed to all their lies and false accusations in their status report and essentially pleaded guilty to all charges without a trial. By the time you get to the end of this horror show you have pleaded guilty to every false charge they threw at you and you never got even one chance to get your truth into the court. The never ending case plan game is just the vehicle to dig up more evidence against you, torture you even more and burry you deeper into the CPS trap so they can steal your children for money! That is what it is all about and it is sick and evil and everyone involved is sick and evil.

6) Let’s not forget your attorney. If you have a court appointed attorney you are screwed. This is not even open for debate. They are working for CPS and they are there to make sure you do exactly what CPS wants you to. Their job is to guide you into each trap and make sure you do not get out. They are also psychopaths and are trained to appear to be helping you when in fact they are just leading the lamb to the slaughter. They make sure the lamb feels comfortable and does not suspect what is really going to happen to them at the end until it is too late and they are slaughtered.

7) Are private attorneys any better? In my experience no. There might be a good one out there but I have never seen one. The CPS criminal conspiracy has also shut the door on good attorneys. To practice juvenile law the attorney typically has to be approved by the juvenile court. Of course you can see the problem there. It is the fox guarding the hen house so only qualified attorneys can practice juvenile law meaning that only the psychopathic ones who have no moral values or ethics and are capable of lying and deceiving their clients to lead the lambs to the slaughter get through. To beat CPS you will have to do your own battles in court Pro se. this allows you to get the truth into court and rebut their false allegations so their lies do not get entered into the court. During the 18 months to 2 years that CPS tortures you this will happen many times. Each time CPS gets all their lies into court and you get not one shred of truth into court so at the end you have nothing and CPS has several judgments against you for all sorts of lies and deceptions and CPS takes your children. The real sick thing about this is that CPS and the court have tricked you into voluntarily giving up your children. Yes, you heard that right; voluntarily give up your children. How is this possible? That is crazy! No it is not, it is the truth because you do not know the law and your rights.
8) NOTE: one of the main frauds of the juvenile court is to allow CPS lies and false allegations to be entered into court and stand as facts on the record making you guilty on all counts. Almost all of the CPS allegations are only hearsay and cannot be entered into evidence in a legitimate court and they are not even signed by CPS under penalty of perjury. However, CPS gets all these lies into the court as facts by tricking you. CPS uses their status reports, where all there lies and false allegations are listed, at each hearing. Then they threaten you that if you do not agree with their new case plan you will lose your children. Of course you agree to get your children back. By agreeing to their new case plan you are also unknowingly agreeing that all the lies in the CPS status report are true. You will find that your own attorney will help you down the path to slaughter by demanding that you agree to the case plan as it is the only way you will get your child back. He will also not rebut any of the CPS lies in court letting them stand as facts. An unrebutted lie will stand as fact in a court. They forgot to tell you that by consenting to their new case plan you were also agreeing that all their false allegations and lies in their status report were true. All of a sudden the CPS lies and false allegations becomes facts on the record by your agreeing to it all and you are guilty as charged. The truth and your story is gone in a puff of smoke. Another CPS smoke and mirrors deception and trick to slowly steal your rights and eventually your children. They do this slowly over an 18 months to 24 months period because if they tried to do it too fast parents would get wise to their scam and rebel which could make it very messy for them. CPS is in no hurry because they are still getting paid by the feds for everyday they have your children. Besides they want you to break down so they can say they were right and you were a bad parent and your children should be taken away. I guess blaming the parents makes these sickos sleep better at night for all the torture and horrendous destruction of families and children they cause.

9) NOTE: Not all CPS and public employees know what is happening. Many of them are not aware of what they are really doing and are just doing what they are told. In reality, there are probably only a few CPS and court employees and attorneys who really know what is going on. However, this is exactly what the problem is. If a CPS employee that does not know what is really going on can lie, cheat, make false acquasation, and do anything they are told to adopt out a child, then that person is a soulless psychopath who has no moral values or human sense of decency and is as guilty as the ones who know what is going on. Ignorance is no excuse. In fact, the real criminals who are running this CPS and court scam actually want these types of people. They can tell them that they are doing the right thing and these people will believe them and can’t tell for themselves that what they are doing is not only wrong but is horrendous and despicable. These types of people are the worst as they are doing wrong and evil activities and think they are right! They are very dangerous and are the same types of people the Nazi’s looked for to be their stooges and informants to carry out their evil plans during WW-II.

10) This is the number one thing you need to know about the American legal and court systems to get your children back. However, you are not going to believe it but until you do you will lose your children. The American legal and court systems are courts of consent only. They are not judicial courts of law. Why? Because the judicial courts have been closed for several years meaning that they have no legal, judicial power or authority because the de facto government where our current courts come from have been bankrupt for years and have no authority or power. What does that mean to you? It means a great deal. First of all, it means that the courts have to get you to agree to do anything. If you do not agree with their charges they cannot proceed. However, it is just not that simple. The judges, who in reality are just actors in black robes, are trained to do anything they can to deceive, lie, coheres, force you into to consenting. After all, they get a cut of the action. They will threaten you will jail, yell at you, lie to you, etc. They are really good at this because they have gotten away with it for many years. If you do not hold your ground, which might mean spending a few days in jail you will be forced to agree and suffer the consequences. But I have been taught to obey the law and the judge is fair. Wrong! Our system now has nothing to do with fairness. The court is the land of contract and fiction and the judge and the state will try and get you to agree with their contract any way they can. All the laws they throw at you only apply if you agree. They will try to make you think that they are compulsory but they only apply if you agree. Their power only comes from your consent.

11) The first trap to watch for is the plea. If they can get you in court to plea, even not guilty, you have entered their jurisdiction and they have trapped you in their contract. You never enter a plea. You always challenge their jurisdiction and argue that you are a “natural man or woman and they do not have jurisdiction and you do not consent to anything they do”. By doing this, they cannot legally proceed as they did not get your consent. Of course, the judge will threaten you and intimidate and trick you in anyway he can. Just keep repeating the same thing “I am natural man or woman and you do not have jurisdiction and I do not consent to anything you do”. If they pressure you to plea or say they will enter a plea for you just keep repeating “I am natural man or woman and you do not have jurisdiction and I do not consent to anything you do”. Do not sign anything!!! In a juvenile case at the first hearing do the same thing. Before the first hearing CPS will try and work out a deal (like a plea bargain but with no guarantee) with you where they tell you that the only way you will get your child back is if you agree with their plan. Remember that this is a trick and a lie to get you to agree with them and enter their jurisdiction so they contract with you so they can steal your children with your consent. Most parents at this point are so upset they will do anything to get their children back. However, do not fall for it!!! Do not sign anything!!! Hold your ground. If you cave in you will lose your children permanently. The odds are about 1 out of 10 that you will get your child back doing what CPS Sais. If they do not give you your child back soon, be prepared to file a Federal complaint against CPS and the county. If they hold your children and you did not agree with them, (did not contract with them) the Federal court will have to rule against CPS as there is no contract and they are nothing more than just criminals kidnapping your children. Remember, the “laws” they are charging you with breaking are unconstitutional color of law frauds and only apply if you agree!!! This is not a joke, this is the truth. The greatest hidden secret of our legal system is that it can only function by your consent only. That is what our constitution did for us and it is still there but the legal criminals (attorneys, judges, politicians) have done everything they can to hide this fact. Never consent to anything!!!! It will always be a trap. It is like the camel who tries to get a toe into the tent. Soon the entire camel will be in the tent and you will be outside in the cold. (jail, no parental rights all because they tricked you into voluntarily consenting)

12) If you are in a CPS case and have already fallen for the CPS scam and agreed to their case plan and consented to their contract it is harder to get out but still possible. It is possible to pull the plug on them at any hearing. Remember, the hearings are where they roll you over into a new case and contract. It is at this point, where you can stop agreeing with them. This is more complicated and you will have to know more about the law and what is happening. Essentially the termination of your agreement consists revoking your signature and consent, firing your attorney and filing a complaint into the Federal Court against CPS and the County for kidnapping, criminal conspiracy, mail fraud, extortion, fraud, etc. At the day of the next hearing on the juvenile case give the bailiff your rescission of signature and consent to everything to date due to fraud and coercion to the judge. Then sk that your attorney be terminated. Then walk out of the court. They will set another hearing date in a few days. At that hearing show up in court and sit behind the bar. Do not cross the bar no matter what the judge sais. Then serve the judge your Federal complaint by giving it to the bailiff in court. Then tell the judge that the court does not have jurisdiction or venue and need to dismiss the juvenile case with prejudice now. Then walk out of court. Then file an emergency motion in Federal court to get your child back. The grounds for the motion, no valid agreement no contract, trespassing because CPS is literally kidnapping your children and are criminals. There is a lot more you need to be able to do this but this is a summary of what needs to be done. As long as your parental rights have not been terminated by a judge you can do this. CPS will not be happy with this so be prepared to be attacked from all sides. Remember, do not consent to anything!!! 11/25/2010-JM

Inditement

From Our Empirial Desk:In:Our Empirial Office:
Supreme Jurisdiction/Venue:For:The Great Turtle Island:
Over All Our Desks:Offices:Chambers:Political:Police:Judicary:
Your Silence As Consent:To:Our Lawfull Stitution:
Is:Accepted For Value:As:Acquiescence:To:Our Jurisdiction/Venue/Law.

Supreme Jurisdiction/Venue:Common Law:Inditement:For:Honest Service Fraud:Is:The Federal Bureau Of Investigation Corporation:Royal Canadian Mounted Police Corporation:Added:To:These Charges:Is:Misprision Of Treason:Is:Misprision Of Felonies:Is:Breach Of Fiduciary Trustee Duties And Obligations To Our Empirial Office:And:The True Beneficiary’s Of The Trusts:
By:The Unlawfull:POSSESSION:Of Winona Rosa:By:The BADPERSONS:Is:Enabling Theft:Harm:Trauma:Against A Child Is Great Sin:To Sit In The Knowledge Of A Crime Of Child Trafficking:Of:Our Child:All Our Children:Noticed By Our Empirial Office:And:Still:Do Nothing About It:Is Great Evil:Is:Guilt:As So Indicted:Collusion:Well Beyond Any Shadow Of Doubt:Transparency Is Hereby Ordered:Solutely:Is:Correction:By Our Empirial Office:Is:Accepted:Solutely.

The Federal Bureau Of Investigation Corporation:Is:Hereby Ordered To Arrest The BADPERSONS:
James F.Quinn:FAMILY COURT.
((Jennifer Haas)):PROSECUTING ATTORNEY.
Michelle Pilo:LAW GUARDIAN.
Taylor Walker:FAMILY LAW ATTORNEY.
Lisa Scafide:SENIOR SOCIAL WORKER.
Lorrie Towns:CASE MANAGER.
Kevin Tase:SENIOR CASE WORKER.
Timothy Ferguson:SENIOR CASE WORKER.
Jessica Palermo:CASE WORKER.
Gregory J Blass:COMMISSIONER.
Steve Levy:SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE.
Jeffery Girley:CASE WORKER-TEAM 17.
SUFFOLK COUNTY:NEW YORK)).
((Brianne Kindinger:SENIOR CASE WORKER.
Pat Markley:SOCIAL WORKER.
Kevin Warton:SUPERVISOR.
Tracy Bly:SENIOR CASE WORKER.
Sherri Denney:SUPERVISOR. Richland County:OHIO)).
Removed:From Desk:From Office:From Our Law:Land:By:Disembarkation:Cancelation Of Oaths And Bonds:Of These BADPERSONS:So Listed:Is:Defilement Of Oaths And Bonds:To Discharge:And:Payforward:All Assests:Of The BADPERSONS:To Our Empirial Office:For The Recovery Of Winona Mae Marzocco:For Her Duress:Alienation:And Social Molestation:And:Enabling The Unlawfull Possession:Of Her Genetic Property:Is:Intellectual Murder:Is:DOMESTIC TERRORISM:Al Et Al.

The Federal Bureau Of Investigation Corporation:Is:Hereby:Fined In The Amount $100,000 Dollars For Every Office:Every Agent In The Knowledge Of These Crimes:Obvious Wire Taps:Computer Attacks: Whatever:F.B.I:NEW YORK:212-384-4073:212-384-4077:F.B.I:WASHINGTON:D.C.:202-278-2000:202-278-2478:F.B.I.Cleveland:216-622-6752:Toledo:419-854-8940.
The Royal Canadian Mounted Police Corporation:Is:Hereby Fined:$50,000 Dollars For Every Agent In The Knowledge Of These Crimes:Against Our Empirial Office:Our Child:Our Children:Our Devine Right.

The Empirial Heirs:

THE LAND STILL BELONGS TO THE KING, AMERICANS WERE NEVER FREE

WERE YOU EVER FREE***CAN YOU BE FREE***WITHOUT OWNING LAND???


THE LAND STILL BELONGS TO THE KING, AMERICANS WERE NEVER FREE


***My Comments***
Well its been 5 years since I released "The United States Is
Still A British Colony, part I". I asked in part 7, the last
chapter, that others having seen the truth and relevance of
this book, do their own research, to see what others across the
country could turn up. Arthur Marron a researcher from one of
the northern states found a document called Treaties and
Conventions, he sent it to the Informer, who forwarded it to me
for me to comment on. The document is from an unlikely source,
the Dept of State, the Secretary of State. The information
contained in it is fascinating, it is further proof of what I
have been saying, as well as the Informer, in his book "The New
History Of America".
Below you will find several quotes I scanned in, along with
my commentary, which as always is brief, the facts speak for
themselves. This document prints out to 15 pages in dos text, new
courier.
I stated in my book that the 1783 Paris peace Treaty DID NOT
give America title to the land, it recognized our use of it, it
DID NOT grant individuals any freedom, it only recognized the
States as independent powers, with the inhabitants being subject
to the States in which they lived. It recognized the States
intent to incorporate into the United States. I asked the simple
question in my book, "if we won the war, how is the king granting
us anything?". I stated this was a continuation of the king's
corporate Charters and that he was allowing through subterfuge
the re incorporation of the States into the United States. I
have stated the king had no lawful, legal right or authority to
grant (cede America by way of title) to anyone, because legally
it was not his to give away. As I have shown in my book the
king's possessions in America were governed by corporate Charters
and that they were also irrevocable trusts, with his heirs and
successors to forever profit from the kings exploration and
conquest of America. Read the following quotes and see what
jumps out to you.***End Comment***

INTRODUCTORY NOTE
"In regulating the commercial and political relations
between the United States and other Powers, these several
Treaties secured the recognition of the Independence of the
United States, and also the assent of other Powers to many
important principles, some of which were not then universally
recognized as constituting part of the public law which should
govern the intercourse of nations with each other."
Treaties and Conventions, Department of State 1889, pg.1220

INTRODUCTORY NOTE
"The power of the new nation whose existence had been
recognized by these Treaties to regulate and control its
commercial relations with foreign Powers was uniformly asserted
in this series of Treaties. They placed each of the other Powers,
in respect of commerce and navigation within each and every
State, on the footing of the most favored nation;...."
Treaties and Conventions, Department of State 1889, pg. 1221

NOTES-GREAT BRITAIN
"The several States which compose this Union, so far, at
least, as regarded their municipal regulations, became entitled
from the time when they declared themselves independent to all
the rights and powers of sovereign States, and did not derive
them from concessions of the British King. The treaty of peace
contains a recognition of the independence of these States, not a
grant of it. The laws of the several State governments passed
after the Declaration of Independence were the laws of sovereign
States, and as such were obligatory upon the people of each
State."
Treaties and Conventions, Department of State 1889, pg. 1338

NOTES-GREAT BRITAIN
"The treaty of peace of 1783 between the United States and
Great Britain was a mere recognition of pre-existing rights as to
territory, and no territory was thereby acquired by way of
cession from Great Britain.3
All British grants are invalid which were made after the
Declaration of Independence, and purported to give title to land
within the territories of the United States as defined by the
Treaty of 1783."
Treaties and Conventions, Department of State 1889, pg. 1339

***My Comment***
1. The Independence was recognized, not granted. The fore
fathers always wanted, listed agnosium in the demands made to the
king prior to the 1776 Declaration of Independence, self
determination so as to not be taxed without representation. This
is exactly what they obtained in the 1783 Paris peace treaty, not
allodial possession of the land.

2. The powers recognized were the States, not the people, just as
the Informer has said in his books, the People being empowered
were the aristocrats setting up the corporation, not the little
people who were to be governed by the States. (Must read the
Informer's book "Which One Are You". Also, get a copy off the
net of Mercier's letter of several hundred pages dealing with
contracts and obligations, must read also.

3. The king knew the 1783 Treaty was not worth the paper it was
written on, just as when king John was forced to sign the Magna
Charta, but he had to take steps to overcome it, so as not to
expose his mode of operation.

4. Also, the land was not his to give away, you will see this in
the below quote, I had many other quotes from court cases and
other legal authorities that stated this in my book.

5. After the Declaration of Independence, according to the
Secretary of State, ALL British grants were and are invalid.

6. I have said this so many times I must sound like a broken
record. We are not free from the Crown, because we do not have
allodial title, never have, could not, we never had it, never
conquered it, were never granted it, nor was it ever ceded to us.
You can claim you are free till hell freezes over, but if you do
not have allodial title to your land, meaning it cannot be taken
from you under any situation, it is an empty declaration. You
cannot have one without the other, it would be like trying to
have water without the wet. You are not a Freeman by definition,
if your land can be taken from you.
From the above quote: "The treaty of peace of 1783 between
the United States and Great Britain was a mere recognition of
PRE-EXISTING rights as to TERRITORY, and NO TERRITORY WAS THEREBY
ACQUIRED BY WAY OF CESSION FROM GREAT BRITAIN". Hello, the
rights to territory, never changed, they remained just they were,
pre-existing; from what? The king's Charters of course, the
original grants, while we were still admitted subjects of the
king, leasing the land from him. At the end of the Revolutionary
War and with the signing of the 1783 Paris Peace Treaty, no
territorial change took place, nor did the status of Americans.
We were not free before the Declaration of Independence,
evidenced by no man having allodial title, and no change took
place after the Declaration of Independence, the Revolutionary
War, or the 1783 Paris Peace Treaty. Why do you think that later
in history you have a grater status than our fore fathers, with
the amazing knowledge they had? The only reason you do is
because this illusion has been propagated by your conquerors, to
keep the servants on the plantation working hard. Stop with the
claim that you are sovereign and have allodial title, as I have
said before, and will continue to say, if your land can be taken
through the none payment of taxes, or through eminent domain, you
are not sovereign, you are not possessing land by allodial title,
I don't care what you believe or have been lead to believe, it
just ain't so. I'll ask another question as I did in my book to
prove this point. How did you acquire your supposed allodial
property, who did you conquer to obtain it, any lessor title of
ownership, is not synonymous with a Freeman? The only way to
acquire allodial title is by conquest, and you must have the
ability to keep it from anyone trying to take it from you.
You must remember a important fact concerning the below
quote, the below quote is true, but must be qualified by saying,
as long as office can be found, if office cannot be found the
land reverts back to the king. Office will always be found for
the original grants to America, this is why the king could not
cede the land to another owner.***End Comment***

NOTES-CESSION OF TERRITORY
"Even in cases of conquest, the conqueror does no more than
displace the sovereign, and assume dominion over the country. 7
Peters, 86; (10 Peters, 720, 729-30, passim). "A cession of
territory is never understood to be a cession of the property of
the inhabitants. THE KING CEDES ONLY THAT WHICH BELONGS TO HIM;
LANDS HE HAD PREVIOUSLY GRANTED, WERE NOT HIS TO CEDE...."
Treaties and Conventions, Department of State 1889, pg. 1253




TREATIES ARE THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND

***My Comment***
I have also stated that treaties are the law of the land,
and have strongly been rebuffed for this position. The reason I
have held this position is because after the advise and consent
to a treaty by the Senate, any Constitutional limitations or
conflicts have tacitly been declared not to exist, making the
treaty equal to and part of our law, the Constitution. Also,
once passed, any laws inconsistent with the treaty, state or
federal, will be corrected by legislation, by Congress or the
Executive Branch. Reread the "International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights", you will see in that Treaty what I am
saying here, and something you may not have noticed before. Read
the following quotes.***End Comment***

NOTES-TREATIES
"A treaty, constitutionally concluded and ratified,
abrogates whatever law of any one of the States may be
inconsistent therewith.
A treaty made conformably to the constitution in substance
and form repeals pre-existing conflicting Federal law.2
Not to observe a treaty is to violate a deliberate and
express engagement, and afford good cause of war. When Congress
takes upon itself to disregard the provisions of any foreign
treaty it, of course, infringes the same, in the exercise of
sovereign right, and voluntarily accepts the casus belli, as
when, in 1798, it annulled the treaties between the United States
and France. See act of July 7, 1798
Under the constitution, treaties, as well as statutes are
the law of the land; both the one and the other, when not
inconsistent with the constitution, standing upon the same level
and being of equal force and validity; and, as is the case of all
laws emanating from an equal authority, the earlier in date
yields to the latter.4"
Treaties and Conventions, Department of State 1889, pg. 1400

INTRODUCTORY NOTE
"The construction put by President Washington on the
agreement of guaranty contained in the 11th article of the Treaty
of 1778 with France, together with the conclusion of the Treaty
of 1794 with England, had affected the relations of the two
countries to such a degree that, in 1798, Congress had, by law,
assumed to exonerate the nation from further obligation to
observe the Treaties with France and the Attorney-General had
given an official opinion that there was a state of war. The
Treaty of 1800 restored the good relations: but in the amendments
on each side the old Treaties entirely disappeared."
Treaties and Conventions, Department of State 1889, pg. 1223

INTRODUCTORY NOTE
"I. A Treaty, constitutionally concluded and ratified, abrogates
all State laws inconsistent therewith. It is the supreme law of
the land, subject. only to the provisions of the constitution.4
[While, however, treaties are a part of the supreme law of
the land, they are nevertheless to be viewed in two lights, that
is to say, in the light of Politics and in the light of juridical
law. The decision of political questions is preeminently the
function of the political branch of the government, of the
Executive or of Congress, as the case may be; and when a
political question is so determined, the courts follow that
determination.

IV. Where a Treaty cannot be executed without the aid of an act
of Congress, it is the duty of Congress to enact such laws.
Congress has never failed to perform that duty.

VIII. The constitution of the United States confers absolutely on
the government of the United States the power of making war and
of making Treaties, from which it follows that government
possesses the power of acquiring territory either by conquest or
by Treaty.9

X. A Treaty of cession is a deed of the ceded territory by the
Sovereign grantor, and the deed is to receive an equitable
construction.

XII. Interest, according to the usage of nations, is a necessary
part of a just national indemnification.2
The Treaty Power under the Constitution has also been the
subject of legislative discussion in Congress.
When the Treaty of 1794 with Great Britain was sent to that
body, Edward Livingston, who was a member of the House, moved
that the President be requested to transmit to the House a copy
of the instructions to Mr. Jay, and of the correspondence and
documents relative to the Treaty. This motion was resisted on the
ground that the Treaty had become the supreme law, and the House
had no constitutional jurisdiction over questions which were
settled by it. The House, however, adopted the resolution, 61
ayes, 33 noes? President Washington replied to this resolution
thus: "Having been a member of the General Convention, and
knowing the principles on which the Constitution was formed, I
have ever entertained but one opinion on this subject, and from
the first establishment of the Government to this moment, my
conduct has exemplified that opinion, that the power of making
treaties is exclusively vested in the President, by and with the
advice and consent of two-thirds of the Senate, provided
two-thirds of the Senators present concur, and that every treaty
so made, and promulgated, thence-forward becomes the law of the
land. * * * As, therefore, it is perfectly clear to
my understanding that the assent of the House of Representatives
is not necessary to the validity of a Treaty; as the Treaty with
Great Britain exhibits in itself all the objects requiring
legislative provision, and on these the papers called for can
throw no light; and as it is essential to time due administration
of the Government that the boundaries fixed by the Constitution
between the different departments should be preserved, a just
regard to the Constitution and to the duty of my office, under
all the circumstances of this case, forbid a compliance with your
request."
The House thereupon, after a short debate, resolved "that it
is not necessary to the propriety of any application from this
House to the Executive for information desired by them, and which
may relate to any constitutional functions of the House, that the
purpose for which such information may be wanted, or to which it
may be applied, should be stated in the application."3"
Treaties and Conventions, Department of State 1889, pg. 1227-1229



TREATIES COME TO AN END WHEN A STATE OF WAR EXISTS


***My Comment***
The following quotes were something I never considered,
while conducting my research for my book. If the signers of a
Treaty later find themselves in the state of war against
themselves, the Treaties made prior to the war are suspended. As
always lawyers want everything their way, depending on what side
of the issue they are on. This issue is no different, when it
benefited the U.S. government, they said yes this is the case,
but then later this secretary says no, war does not suspend
treaties, or it just suspends parts of the treaties. The
government lawyers are disingenuous as always, but Britain was
telling the truth on this subject. It does not take a rocket
scientist to figure this out, just use a little common sense, if
you have a treaty with someone saying you can fish my waters, and
you then are being attacked by that person, are you going to
continue to allow them to fish your waters? I think not. You
read the below quotes, you be the judge. ***End Comment***

INTRODUCTORY NOTE
"Mr. Monroe, in an early stage of negotiations with Holland,
for this purpose, informed the Dutch Minister at Washington that
"the Treaties between the United States and some of the Powers of
Europe having been annulled by causes preceding from the state
of Europe for some time past, and other Treaties having expired,
the United States have now to form their system of commercial
intercourse with every Power, as it were, at the same time."
Treaties and Conventions, Department of State 1889, pg. 1224

ABROGATED, SUSPENDED, OR OBSOLETE TREATIES
"Great Britain 1782 (VII.), 1783 (VII.),
1794 (Ii. and VII.), 1796 (V II.), 1798
(VII.), 1802 (VII.). 1827 (Vi.), 1854
(III.), 1862 (VI.), 1871 (lit.)."
Treaties and Conventions, Department of State 1889, pg. 1232

NOTES-ALIENS AND ALIENAGE
"VII. Treaties the Executory parts of which are claimed to have
been terminated by war: [Great Britain, 1782, 1783, 1794, and the
Additional and Explanatory Articles thereto, and 1802; Mexico,
1831 and the Additional Article thereto, but Article 17 of the
Treaty or February 2, 1848 revived the Treaty except so far as
the stipulations were incompatible and except the additional
Article; Tripoli, 1796.
After the conclusion of the Treaty of Ghent it was claimed
by Great Britain that the rights which the Americans had enjoyed
in the British fisheries before the war, under the Treaty of
1783, had been lost through the abrogation of the Treaty in
consequence of the war. John Quincy Adams, who was the United
States Minister at London at that time, contended that the Treaty
of 1783 was not "one of those which by the common understanding
and usage of civilized nations is or can be considered as
annulled by a subsequent war between the same parties.1 Lord
Bathnrst replied, "To a position of this novel nature Great
Britain cannot accede. She knows of no exception to the rule that
all Treaties are put an end to by a subsequent war between the
same parties."2 During the negotiations which followed Great
Britain never abandoned that position, and the United States may
be said to have acquiesced in it. By it they secured the
exclusion of Great Britain from the Mississippi, the free and
open navigation of which was granted to the subjects of Great
Britain forever by the Treaty which Lord Bathurst set aside.
The political department of the Government of the United
States assumed the same position during the Mexican war.
President Polk, in his annual message to Congress, in December,
1847, said, "A state of war abrogates Treaties previously
existing between belligerents, and a treaty of peace puts an end
to all claims for indemnity."3"
Treaties and Conventions, Department of State 1889, pg. 1237

NOTES-TREATIES
""But we are not inclined to admit the doctrine urged at the
bar, that treaties become extinguished, ipso facto, by war
between the two governments, unless they should be revived by an
express or implied renewal on the return of peace. * * There may
be treaties of such a nature, as to their object and import, as
that war will put an end to them; but where treaties contemplate
a permanent arrangement of territorial and other national rights,
or which, in their terms, are meant to provide for the event of
an intervening war, it would be against every principle of just
interpretation to hold them extinguished by the event of war. if
such were the law, even the treaty of 1783, so far as it fixed
our limits, and acknowledged our independence, would be gone, and
we should have had again to struggle for both upon original
revolutionary principles."7
"We think, therefore, that treaties stipulating for
permanent rights, and general arrangements, and professing to aim
at perpetuity, and to deal with the case of war as well as of
peace, do not cease on the occurrence of war, but are at most
only suspended while it lasts; and unless they are waived by the
parties, or new and repugnant stipulations are made, they revive
in their operation at the return of peace.
The termination of a treaty by war does not divest rights of
property already vested under it.2"
Treaties and Conventions, Department of State 1889, pg. 1400-1401

INTRODUCTORY NOTE
VII. Treaties do not generally ipso facto become extinguished by
war. Vested rights of property will not become divested in such
case.
Treaties and Conventions, Department of State 1889, pg. 1227-1229




THE LAW OF CONQUEST

***My Comment***
The Treaties of 1782, 1783 and 1794 were suspended and
abrogated by the War of 1812. The king knew this, and I believe
this was one of the reasons he instigated our declaring war on
Britain, allowing the king to get out of the legal mess he had
gotten himself into by signing the Paris Treaty. However, to be
fair, the king thought the Treaties were already in jeopardy if
not abrogated, by the U.S. for not paying its war debt and
interest.***End Comment***

NOTES-CESSION OF TERRITORY
"The formation of the civil government in California, when
it was done, was the lawful exercise of a belligerents right over
a conquered territory."
Treaties and Conventions, Department of State 1889, pg. 1251

NOTES-CESSION OF TERRITORY
"The usage of the world is, if a nation be not entirely
subdued, to consider the holding of conquered territory as a mere
military occupation, until its fate shall be determined at the
treaty of peace. If it be ceded by treaty, the acquisition is
confirmed, and the ceded territory becomes a part of the nation
to which it is annexed, either on the terms stipulated in the
treaty of cession, or on such as its new master shall impose."
Treaties and Conventions, Department of State 1889, pg. 1251

NOTES-GREAT BRITAIN
"Jefferson met this on the 15th of December, by a note
stating briefly the American position as to the British
infractions of the Treaty and producing evidence in its support.6
This drew from Hammond an elaborate reply the 5th of March, 1792,
in which he contended (1.) that the United States had failed to
execute the 4th article of the Treaty, by not preventing the
placing of impediments in the way of the recovery, in sterling,
of debts due to British subjects; (2) that interest had not been
allowed on judgments in favor of British creditors; and (3) that
article 5 had not been carried into effect by the United States,
inasmuch as confiscated estates had not been restored; and that
therefore "the measure that the King has adopted (of delaying his
compliance with the 7th article of the Treaty) is perfectly
justifiable." To this, Jefferson, on the 29th of May, 1792,
replied, (1) that impediments, within the meaning of the
Treaty, had not been thrown in the way of the collection of
British debts is the United States; (2) that interest is not an
integral part of a debt under British and American law, and
therefore it was not embraced in the Treaty; (3) that the United
States had only undertaken in the Treaty to recommend the States
to restore confiscated estates, and had fully complied with that
agreement; and he showed conclusively that it was understood both
by the Ministry and by both Houses of Parliament, when the Treaty
was negotiated, that the American Plenipotentiaries not only
would not agree to restore the confiscated estates, but expressed
the opinion that the States themselves would not restore them,
even if recommended by Congress to do so; (4) that the British
infractions of the Treaty, so far from being the result of
alleged infractions by the United States, preceded them, and were
in no way dependent upon them.'
More than a year elapsed without a reply. Jefferson then, on
the 19th of June, 1793, wrote Hammond, asking when one might be
expected. "The subject," be said, "was extensive and important,
and therefore rendered a certain degree of delay in the reply to
be expected. But it has now become such as naturally to generate
disquietude. The interests we have in the Western posts, the
blood and treasure which their detention costs us daily, cannot
but produce a corresponding anxiety on our part."2 Hammond
replied that as soon as he should receive instructions the reply
should be transmitted, and added, "There is one passage in your
letter of yesterday, Sir, of which it becomes me to take some
notice. The passage I allude to is that wherein you mention `the
blood and treasure which the detention of the Western posts costs
the United States daily.' I cannot easily conjecture the motives
in which this declaration has originated. After the evidence that
this Government has repeatedly received of the strict neutrality
observed by the King's Governors of Canada, during the present
contest between the United States and the Indians, and of the
disposition of those officers to facilitate, as far as may be in
their power, any negotiations for peace, I will not for a moment
imagine that the expression I have cited was intended to convey
the insinuation of their having pursued a different conduct."
Jefferson made no response to this. In a few months he again
asked Hammond whether he was prepared to reply on this subject of
the infractions of the Treaty.4 No answer was ever made.
In the autumn of 1793 a new question of difference arose.
The Admiralty instructions to British ships of War and
privateers, issued in June, 1793, ordered the seizure of all
neutral vessels laden with corn, flour, or meal, destined for
French ports, and of all neutral vessels, except those of Denmark
and Sweden, attempting to enter any blockaded port.5 As Denmark,
Sweden, and the United States were the principal neutral maritime
powers, there was no question as to the vessels against which the
latter provision was aimed. When complaint was made of the order
to seize vessels laden with provisions, it was justified by Great
Britain on the assumption that provisions were contraband of
war.6 Edmund Randolph, Jefferson's successor as Secretary of
State, met this by saying: "We have labored to cultivate with the
British nation perfect harmony. We have not attempted by a
revival of maxims which, if ever countenanced, are now
antiquated, to blast your agriculture or commerce. To be
persuaded, as you wish, that the instructions of the 8th of June,
1793, are in a conciliatory spirit, is impossible. And be
assured, Sir, that it is a matter of sincere regret to learn the
intention of your Government to adhere to them, notwithstanding
our representations, which utter, as we flatter ourselves, the
decent but firm language of right."
Under such circumstances President Washington, on the 16th
of April, 1794, sent a message to the Senate, in which, referring
to the "serious aspect of' our affairs with Great Britain," he
said: "But, as peace ought to he pursued with unremitted zeal,
before the last resource, which has so often been the scourge of
nations, and cannot fail to check the advancing prosperity of the
United States, is contemplated, I have thought proper to
nominate, and do hereby nominate, John Jay as Envoy Extraordinary
of the United States to His Britannic Majesty."
The nomination was confirmed by a vote of 18 to 8. Jay's
instructions were dated the 6th of May, 1794.2 He sailed from New
York on the 12th of the same month.3
He had scarcely left the shores of the United States when a
new and still more irritating cause of difference arose. Lord
Dorchester, the Governor-General of the British possessions in
America, in a speech to the Indian tribes which were in hostility
with the United States, said: "Children, since my return I find
no appearance of a line remains, and, from the manner in which
the people of the States push on, and act and talk on this side,
and from what I learn of their conduct towards the sea, I shall
not be surprised if we are at war with them in the course of the
present year; and, if so, a line must then be drawn by the
warriors." Simultaneously with this three companies of a British
regiment went to the foot of the rapids of the Miami, in the
southern part of what is now the State of Ohio, to build a fort
there.' When complaints were made of these hostile acts, the
British Minister at Washington justified both as defensible
preparations for an actual state of war about to begin between
the two nations, and he retorted by complaining of the fitting
out of French privateers in American ports, and of the "uniformly
unfriendly treatment which His Majesty's ships of war * *
experienced in the American ports." President Washington, in
transmitting the correspondence to both Houses of Congress. said:
"This new state of things suggests the propriety of placing the
United States in a posture of effectual preparation for an event
which, notwithstanding the endeavors making to avert it, may, by
circumstances beyond our control, be forced upon us."
The treaty concluded by Jay on the 19th of November, 1794,
removed or suspended these grave causes of difference. It named a
day for the withdrawal of British troops from the territories of
the United States. The United States undertook to make
compensation to British creditors who had been prevented by
"lawful impediments,"8 in violation of the Treaty of 1783, from
the recovery of their debts. Great Britain agreed to make
compensation to the merchants and citizens of the United States
whose vessels had been illegally captured or condemned, The
United States undertook to make compensation to certain British
subjects whose vessels or merchandise had been captured within
the jurisdiction of the United States and brought into the same;
or had been captured by vessels originally armed in the ports of
the United States. it was agreed that provisions and other
articles not generally contraband of war should not be
confiscated if seized, but that the owners should be fully
indemnified; and that vessels approaching a blockaded port, in
ignorance of the blockade, should not be detained, nor the cargo
confiscated unless contraband."
Treaties and Conventions, Department of State 1889, pg. 1319-1321



BRITAIN THROUGH WAR WAS LEGISLATING FOR THE UNITED STATES


***My Comment***
What was the another cause and effect of the War of 1812?
The biggest slave trading nation in the world would use this
divisive issue against America in the Ghent Treaty of 1815,
knowing once passed, legislation would have to be passed by the
American Congress, to comply with the Treaty. Knowing this issue
would divide the North from the South, to divide and then
conquer. Was this the only way Britain attacked the United
States, no they used even more subversive ways, the creation and
control of the Bank of the United States in 1791-1811 and again
in 1816-1836, which could not have be done without Washington
creating federal District overlays in every state in March of
1791, the same month the bank was Chartered, I might add, when
this took place Congress was out of session. This was the case
until President Jackson drove a stake through its heart.
However, their control over the money, finances and the media was
so complete, with their bought Congressman and Senators we were
doomed. The other way they completed their attack and Conquest
was through the Lawyers and Judges they controlled, to overrule
and rewrite long standing stare decisis, coinciding with their
destruction of our documents in Washington during the War of
1812. There is no telling the significance of the documents that
were destroyed, one document we know of, was the existence of the
original Thirteenth Amendment, which would have forever driven a
stake through the heart of the legal professions influence over
our government, making it illegal for them to hold office in the
U.S. government, because of their conflict of interest, serving
two masters. This would have destroyed the kings ability to
legislate for the United States, for he would have no access to
our government through his esquires.***End Comment***

***Comment by the Informer***
"One has to read the treatise by Charles Warren titles the
History Of The American Bar, published 1966 by Howard Fertig and
Little , Brown and co., lib. Of cong. Card # 66-24357. This will
tell you the entire sordid history of lawyers, when they started,
where they started, how they came to be the scourge of American
colonies before the revolutionary war and how they seemingly
became the good guys at the time of 1774 to 1790. It explains
the middle and inner temples of the bar and how they influenced
the American courts to the point that all the non lawyer judges
said they would some day rule the courts and every aspect of life
in America. Now that has come to pass and this was predicted
back in 1774. This book cannot be skim read and is 581 pages.
After you read this you will know why the king placed the inner
and middle temple lawyers in America so that he would have rule
of the courts and why the war of 1812 was created to destroy the
original 13th Amendment. Without the esquires the king was dead
in the water so to speak." ***End Comment the Informer***

***My Comment***
Have you never wondered why our system of government so
mirrors the British system? I bet many of you yet today have no
idea where our federal reserve system comes from. It is the copy
of the British Exchequer, it was written in secret by the Bank of
England. Don't believe it, I suggest you read a Book I wrote
back in 1992 called "A Country Defeated In Victory, parts 1 and
2", the facts cannot be disputed, much of which is Congressional
Record. There are many other policies and programs we have that
mirror Britain's, but I will not go into them here. So read the
following quotes, then contemplate what it means that the above
Treaties were suspended.***End Comment***

NOTES-GREAT BRITAIN
"On the 1st of June, 1812, President Madison transmitted a
confidential message to Congress respecting the relations with
Great Britain. It ended without recommending any particular
action.2 It was received in each Body with closed doors.3 In the
House it was considered on the 2d and 3d of June with closed
doors. On the 3d, Calhoun, from the Committee on Foreign
Relations to whom it had been referred, reported (the House being
in secret session) "that after the experience which the United
States have had of the great injustice of the British Government
towards them, exemplified by so many acts of violence and
oppression, it will be more difficult to justify to the impartial
world their patient forbearance, than the measures to which it
has become necessary to resort to avenge the wrongs and vindicate
the rights and honor of the nation. * The period has now arrived
when the United States must support their character and station
among the nations of the earth. * More than seven years have
elapsed since the commencement of this system of hostile
aggressions by the British Government on the rights and interests
of the United States. * As early as 1804 the Minister of the
United States at London was instructed to invite the British
Government to enter into a negotiation on all the points on which
a collision might arise between the two countries in the course
of the war, and to propose to it an arrangement of their claims
on fair and reasonable conditions. The invitation was accepted. *
it was at this time, and under these circumstances that an attack
was made, by surprise, upon an important branch of the American
Commerce. * The commerce on which this attack was so unexpectedly
made, was that between the United States and the Colonies of
France, Spain, and other enemies of Great Britain. * In May,
1806, the whole coast of the continent from the Elbe to Brest,
inclusive, was declared to be in a state of blockade. By this act
the well-established principles of the law of nations--principles
which have served for ages as guides, and fixed the boundary
between the rights of belligerents and neutrals--were violated. *
The next act of the British Government which claims our attention
is the order of council, of January 7, 1807, by which neutral
powers are prohibited from trading from one port to another of
France or her allies, or any other country with which Great
Britain might not freely trade. * We proceed to bring into view
the British order in council of November 11, 1807. * By this
order all France and her allies, and every other country at war
with Great Britain, or with which she was not at war, from which
the British flag was excluded, and all the colonies of her
enemies, were subjected to the same restrictions as if they were
actually blockaded in the most strict and rigorous manner; and
all trade in articles, the produce and manufacture of the said
countries and colonies, and the vessels engaged in it, were
subject to capture and condemnation as lawful prize. The attempt
to dismember our Union, and overthrow our excellent Constitution,
by a secret mission, the object of which was to foment discontent
and excite insurrection against the constituted authorities and
laws of the nation, as lately disclosed by the agent employed in
it, affords full proof that there is no bound to the hostility of
the British Government against the United States."
Treaties and Conventions, Department of State 1889, pg. 1325-1326

NOTES-GREAT BRITAIN
"From this review of the multiplied wrongs of the British
Government, since the commencement of the present war, it must be
evident to the impartial world that the contest which is now
forced on the United States is radically a contest for their
sovereignty and independence."
Treaties and Conventions, Department of State 1889, pg. 1326

***My Comment***
Finally America, it does not get any plainer than the facts
above. Unless you can hold your hand up to the government when
they come to take your land, and say: stop, "you cannot come on
my land", and the government turns away and never comes back, to
bother you or your heirs again, the arguments you may have with
what I said above are bogus, because the nexus between allodial
and Freeman cannot be overcome.
America is there any hope of your waking up, why must you be
hit over the head over and over with truth? Still you make bogus
claims in the courts, just to have the judges admonish you for
your foolishness? Do you have to go to jail before you say
"Damn, something is not right here, things are not as they
appear, black is white, white is black"? As long as you don't
know the enemy, nor the weapons used against you in this warfare,
how in God's name do you think anything will change? Much of
America, the Christians are waiting for Jesus Christ to come back
and take care of the problem. Christians unless you can figure a
way to force Christ off His Throne, before His enemies are
destroyed, thereby forcing Him to violate His Word, you are going
to have a very long wait, and continue to go down the crapper
while you wait. Why the strong admonishment, because I'm tired
of America accepting a lie, to acquiesce for the easiest path,
rather than facing up to the facts of their legal and financial
enslavement, because only when you face up to a problem will you
do anything about it. As long as you wish to accept voluntary
slavery, which is legal, the remedy will never be learned or
used.
I have said all the above to say this, there is a way to
change this, and I am not talking of armed rebellion or
insurrection. In fact, it is the only way of reaching the level
of freedom we seek, and what we have a right to demand, thereby
removing the yokes from around our necks. The answer does not
lie in a civil remedy, as I stated several times above in dealing
with mans physical attempts to do it his way. Our Freedom has to
do with a Trust granted by our Father in Heaven, I am working on
a short paper, that will explain how we can regain our freedom
through His knowledge, thereby exercising our rights provided in
our Trust, as the legitimate heirs of Christ's Kingdom, the neat
thing is, just as with the worldly kings system, no one has
access to our Trust, except the heirs of Christ, until then keep
the faith.***End Comment***


James Franklin Montgomery

Constitutional Protection for Parental Rights

Constitutional Protection for Parental Rights The Meyer-Pierce Legacy Robert P. George and Jana V.T. Baldwin June, 1994 [T]he custody, care and nurture of the child [should] reside first in the parents, whose primary function and freedom include preparation for obligations the state can neither supply nor hinder.1 The child is not the mere creature of the State; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.2 For the last several decades, a significant amount of social and legal commentary has focused on the relationship of parent to child and the family to the state. As the economic and political life of America has changed profoundly over the years, family law has correspondingly undergone a host of changes. Today, as a result of the crisis confronting the American family, a scholarly, legal and public debate rages over family policy.3 "Children's Rights" advocates argue that children should have, and the state should recognize, greater autonomy from their parents in deciding how to live. Indeed, some scholars and activists argue for the liberation of children from their parents control as part of a larger attack on the institution of the nuclear family.4 Against this backdrop, the Constitution limits the use of state power to diminish parental rights and undermine the family. Although the Constitution does not deal explicitly with parental authority, the Supreme Court has specifically recognized parental rights of custody and control. In the landmark decision of Meyer v. Nebraska,5 closely followed by Pierce v. Society of Sisters,6 the Court stated that parents have a substantive due process right to "bring up children."7 Although these cases were handed down in the 1920s they are no mere archaisms, but rather have withstood the test of time. Indeed, Justice Brennan has remarked of Meyer and its progeny: "I think I am safe in saying that no one doubts the wisdom or validity of those decisions."8 The precedents Meyer and Pierce generated have further solidified the principle that parents should have the predominant role in raising their children. In Meyer,9 the Supreme Court held that the right of parents to raise their children free from unreasonable state interferences is one of the unwritten "liberties" protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.10 The Court invalidated a state statute prohibiting foreign language instruction to school children, recognizing the right of German-speaking parents to have their children taught German. The Court found that the state's interest in encouraging American ideals by prohibiting the teaching of foreign languages is not great enough to permit infringement of the rights of parents to raise their children as they see fit.11 The Court rested its opinion in large part on the rights of parents to control the activities of their children,12 concluding that the statute was an interference "...with the power of parents to control the education of their own."13 Two years after Meyer, the Supreme Court in Pierce14 invalidated an Oregon statute requiring parents to send their children to public school, holding that the statute "unreasonably interfere[d] with the liberty of parents and guardians to direct the upbringing and education of children under their control."15 Pierce made clear that the constitutional rights of a parent are not limited to physical custody, but that parents possess the right to direct their child's "destiny."16 The principle enunciated by Meyer and Pierce, that parents have the right to direct the upbringing and education of their children, has survived the many turbulent changes of the last several decades. A line of decisions following Meyer and Pierce further cemented the rights of parents to exercise their own best judgment in raising their children. For example, twenty years after Pierce, the Supreme Court in Prince v. Massachusetts17 stated that "[i]t is cardinal with us that the custody, care and nurture of the child reside first in the parents, whose primary function and freedom include preparation for obligations the state can neither supply nor hinder."18 Meyer also helped undergird the Supreme Court's decision in Parham v. J.R.19 In Parham, the Supreme Court deferred to parents' wishes to place their child in a mental hospital, stating that "the law's concept of the family rests on a presumption that parents possess what a child lacks in maturity, experience, and capacity for judgment required for making life's difficult decisions.20 The Court emphasized that simply "because the decision of a parent is not agreeable to a child or because it involves risks does not automatically transfer the power to make that decision from the parents to some agency or officer of the state."21 More recently, in the prominent case of Santosky v. Kramer,22 the Supreme Court acknowledged that "freedom of personal choice in matters of family life is a fundamental liberty" and stated that natural parents have a "fundamental liberty interest...in the care, custody, and management of their child."23 Similarly, in Bowen v. American Hospital Ass'n,24 the Supreme Court recognized "a presumption...that parents are the appropriate decisionmaker for their infants."25 The constitutional protection of parental rights recognized by the federal courts has been affirmed and enforced by state courts.26 The recent case of Alfonso v. Fernandez27 illustrates that the parental rights doctrine, while viable, is under attack today. In Alfonso, parents of New York high school students challenged the New York School Board's condom distribution program, arguing, among other things, that the program unconstitutionally denied parents the right to opt their children out of the distribution program. On December 30, 1993, a New York appeals court held that the New York Board of Education's condom distribution program was illegal and unconstitutional absent a parental opt-out provision. Citing Meyer and Pierce, the court recognized that the petitioners enjoy a "well-recognized liberty interest in rearing and educating their children in accord with their own views..." including "the right to regulate their children's sexual behavior as best they can..."28 The court determined that "no matter how laudable its purpose, by excluding parental involvement, the condom availability component of the program impermissibly trespasse[d] on the petitioners' parents rights" by substituting the School Board's judgment for the petitioners' judgment without a compelling necessity.29 Alfonso demonstrates that the Constitution still stands as a staunch defender of parental rights. Alfonso and its parental rights predecessors such as Meyer and Pierce are rooted in the recognition that parents possess the right "to direct the upbringing and education of children under theircontrol."30 Despite the firm constitutional basis for parental rights, traditional concepts of parental authority are under attack from private and public groups seeking to give the state greater control of the upbringing of children, as evidenced by the appeals in the Alfonso case. Opponents of parental rights understand perfectly well the significance of Meyer and Pierce as obstacles to their agenda, and the need to undermine these precedents in order to achieve their goals.31 In accordance with the court's decision in Alfonso, the New York Board of Education voted to revise the condom distribution policy to permit parents or guardians of unemancipated students to opt their children out of the distribution component of the program. The New York Civil Liberties Union ("NYCLU"), however, moved to intervene in the action for the purposes of filing an appeal and People About Changing Education ("PACE") and the Coalition For the Homeless moved for leave to appear as amici curiae to argue in favor of reversing the court's ruling. These groups argued that affording "parents or guardians an `absolute veto' over unemancipated minors [ability] to receive condoms [in school] impermissibly infringes on New York City public school students' [constitutional] rights."32 The court denied NYCLU's motion to intervene, and the NYCLU lost a subsequent appeal of that denial. The New York Bar Association and the New York State Attorney General had also moved to appear as amici curiae in favor of the NYCLU's motion to intervene and in opposition to the court's ruling. The relentless zeal with which the NYCLU (and even the State of New York, as represented by the New York Attorney General), sought to overturn the court's ruling in Alfonso makes clear that the right of parents to make substantive choices regarding their children's education and moral upbringing remains in jeopardy. In short, the protection of parental rights should not have to be achieved on a piecemeal basis through unpredictable and expensive court challenges. The constitutional mandate articulated by Meyer and its progeny is clear: The right of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children shall not be infringed. Robert P. George is an Associate Professor of Politics at Princeton University, and a Presidential Appointee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. He is the author of Making Men Moral: Civil Liberties and Public Morality (Oxford University Press, 1993). Jana V.T. Baldwin was counsel for plaintiffs in Alfonso v. Fernandez, the December, 1993 decision which overturned New York City's condom distribution policy. The views expressed in this memo are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of other organizations with whom they are affiliated. Endnotes 1. Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158, 166 (1944). 2. Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510, 535 (1925). 3. For commentary discussing the difficulties facing today's family, see generally, Giving Children a Chance: The Case for More Effective National Policies, (George Miller ed., 1989); Sylvia Hewlett, When the Bough Breaks: The Cost of Neglecting Our Children (1991); Rebuilding the Nest: A New Commitment to the American Family (David Blankenhorn et al. eds., 1990). 4. See generally, Barbara Bennett Woodhouse, Hatching the Egg: A Child-Centered Perspective on Parent's Rights, 14 Cardozo L. Rev. 1747 (1993) (arguing that parents' rights, "as currently understood, undermine values of responsibility and mutuality necessary to children's welfare"); Katherine T. Bartlett, Rethinking Parenthood as an Exclusive Status: The Need for Legal Alternatives When the Premise of the Nuclear Family Has Failed, 70 Va. L. Rev. 879, 882 (1984) (challenging "the law's adherence to the exclusive view of parenthood when the premise of the nuclear family has failed"). 5. 262 U.S. 390 (1923). 6. 268 U.S. 510 (1925). 7. Meyer, 262 U.S. at 399. 8. Michael H. v. Gerald D., 491 U.S. 110, 142 (Brennan, J. dissenting). 9. 262 U.S. 399 (1923). 10. Id. at 399 ("[T]he liberty [guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment] denotes not merely freedom from bodily restraint but also the right of the individual to...marry, establish a home and bring up children"). Conservative critics of the notion of substantive due process have observed that Meyer (and Pierce) is defensible even if the substantive due process doctrine on which the Court relied is not. See, eg., Robert H. Bork, The Tempting of America (New York: Free Press, 1990), pp. 47-49. 11. Id. at 400-01. 12. Id. 13. Id. at 401. 14. 268 U.S. 510 (1925). 15. 268 U.S. at 534-35. 16. Id. 17. 321 U.S. 158 (1944). 18. Id. at 166. 19. 442 U.S. 584 (1979). 20. Id. at 602. 21. Id. at 603. 22. 455 U.S. 745 (1982). 23. Id. at 753. 24. 476 U.S. 610 (1986) (plurality opinion). 25. Id. at 628 n.13 (quoting President's Comm'n for the Study of Ethical problems in Medicine and Biomedical Behavior Research, Report, at 212-214 (1983)). 26. See, e.g., Hawk v. Hawk, 855 S.W.2d 573, 579 (Tenn. 1993) ("the reasoning of federal constitutional cases convince[s] us that parental rights constitute a fundamental liberty interest" under the Tennessee Constitution); Bailey v. Menzie, 542 N.E.2d 1015, 1019 (Ind. Ct. App. 1989) ("we are fully cognizant of parents' well settled right under the Fourteenth Amendment to raise their families generally as they see fit"); Olds v. Olds, 356 N.W.2d 571, 574 (Iowa 1984) ("the parenting right is a fundamental liberty interest that is protected against unwarranted state intrusion"); People v. Sheppard, 429 N.E.2d 1049, 1052 (N.Y. 1981) (it "is well settled that parents generally have a right under the Fourteenth Amendment to raise their families as they see fit"). 27. 606 N.Y.S.2d 259 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993). 28. Id. at 265. 29. Id. 30. Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205, 233 (1972); Meyer, 262 U.S. 390, 401 (1923). 31. See, e.g., Barbara Bennett Woodhouse, "Who Owns the Child? Meyer and Pierce and the Child as Property" 33 William and Mary Law Review, 995 (1992) 32. Brief Amici Curiae of People About Changing Education (PACE) and the Coalition for the Homeless at p. 13. . For commentary discussing the difficulties facing today's family, see generally, Giving Children a Chance: The Case for More Effective National Policies, (George Miller ed., 1989); Sylvia Hewlett, When the Bough Breaks: The Cost of Neglecting Our Children (1991); Rebuilding the Nest: A New Commitment to the American Family (David Blankenhorn et al. eds., 1990). . See generally, Barbara Bennett Woodhouse, Hatching the Egg: A Child-Centered Perspective on Parent's Rights, 14 Cardozo L. Rev. 1747 (1993) (arguing that parents' rights, "as currently understood, undermine values of responsibility and mutuality necessary to children's welfare"); Katherine T. Bartlett, Rethinking Parenthood as an Exclusive Status: The Need for Legal Alternatives When the Premise of the Nuclear Family Has Failed, 70 Va. L. Rev. 879, 882 (1984) (challenging "the law's adherence to the exclusive view of parenthood when the premise of the nuclear family has failed"). . 262 U.S. 390 (1923).