22 May 2008
Court: Texas had no right to take polygamists’ kids
Posted by Terrie Soberg under: Constitution in Peril; What's News .
As Benjamin noted earlier this morning:
SAN ANGELO, Texas (AP) - A state appellate court has ruled that child welfare officials had no right to seize more than 400 children living at a polygamist sect’s ranch. The Third Court of Appeals in Austin ruled that the grounds for removing the children were “legally and factually insufficient” under Texas law. They did not immediately order the return of the children.
Child welfare officials removed the children on the grounds that the sect pushed underage girls into marriage and sex and trained boys to become future perpetrators.
The appellate court ruled the chaotic hearing held last month did not demonstrate the children were in any immediate danger, the only measure of taking children from their homes without court proceedings.
22 Comments so far...
E.E. Says:
22 May 2008 at 2:06 pm.
The outcome of this is going to be important to show if we are going to still even attempt to follow the Constitution or not. I have heard a number of the mother’s interviewed and they said they will do whatever they have to do to get their kids back. They are being asked to jump through a ridiculous amount of hoops and they are doing it. To withhold their kids would be worse than criminal.
avatar Says:
22 May 2008 at 2:07 pm.
Good for that appellate court! (Although I am not sure why it did not order the immediate return of the FLDS children, once it found the lower court’s ruling concerning “immediate danger” defective.) I suspect we’re going to hear a lot more about this, especially if the FLDS adults also challenge the way Texas ran roughshod over their due process rights. It’s almost an ideal case for establishing the rights of individuals against overzealous state officials investigating suspected crimes against children, given the unpopular nature of the FLDS and the red herring created by the group’s practice of polygamy.
Carrie Says:
22 May 2008 at 3:02 pm.
I am worried about the trauma the kids have gone through. I have heard so many bad stories about foster care. I hope they get them back to there parents very fast.
Stumpy Says:
22 May 2008 at 5:23 pm.
Sure is a beautiful day here in - um - here in my home state of - lets see…New Mexico.
Hank Says:
22 May 2008 at 5:31 pm.
So Stumpy, you’re disowning Texas now? I thought you and Cat were going to Rambo these jokers into line?
Stumpy Says:
22 May 2008 at 5:35 pm.
Well Hank - Cat and me did some recon and figured we couldnt take out all 5 million government conspirators converging on them pilgrim women an there kids.
Pickles Says:
22 May 2008 at 5:47 pm.
Stumpy where have you been?
Stumpy Says:
22 May 2008 at 5:53 pm.
Pickles girl ya always sniff me out it seems when I git on here. An I thought Iffer was the professional sniffer but by golly I think ya got her beat.
I been workin my tail off farmin. I had to go and borrow my asses tail cause I was kind enough not to work my ass off to. Now when I milk her I dont get her swishin her tail in my face but I do git a lot a flies.
Mac Says:
22 May 2008 at 5:57 pm.
I wish it was winter Stumpy, so you had more time to keep us entertained.
Pickles Says:
22 May 2008 at 5:58 pm.
Looks like I finally bumped out Iffer all the way. Hooray!
Jesse Says:
22 May 2008 at 6:10 pm.
Lots of people are confused about this issue of the FLDS and what the courts did. They say that even if the state overstepped its bounds, they have to stop what is going on at the ranch. The answer is simple but Americans for the most part no longer understand it. The rule of law is what protects us so we don’t get tossed to and fro with every wind of doctrine. In a pure democracy we can decide every single thing case by case based on the current whim. We are a republic so the rule of law should have prevailed and the rights of the FLDS be protected. Sure they can enforce having the girls wait until they are older but they way over stepped the bounds. This has to be protected or all of our rights are in jeopardy. It never stops with one abuse of the Constitution.
Cavetrollhead Says:
22 May 2008 at 7:01 pm.
Thank God. This is such wonderful news. I was really anxious, shocked, frightened and appalled about this. Maybe the Constitution has some life left in it after all. I was afraid that rule from the Gut was taking over.
Let’s keep praying for these poor families to be reunited soon.
T. Fan Says:
22 May 2008 at 8:39 pm.
Amen!
avatar Says:
22 May 2008 at 11:56 pm.
Yeah, a lot of people seem to confuse the issue of whether they approve of the FLDS with whether the seized children were in any immediate danger. If the authorities have reason to suspect the law is being broken at the FLDS ranch, let them investigate all they want–while respecting the civil rights of those who live there. The recent revelation that over a dozen of the purported “underage teen mothers” seized and put into foster care are actually adults, one of them 27, pretty much shows how badly this has been handled.
Jesse Says:
23 May 2008 at 1:12 am.
Avatar, that right there takes away any pretense that they were completely altruistic in their motives.
avatar Says:
23 May 2008 at 10:19 am.
Jesse, I agree. As mistakes go, it just doesn’t survive the blush test. By that point (maybe throughout), the state officials had an agenda and didn’t want to let contrary facts get in the way.
Cavetrollhead Says:
23 May 2008 at 7:18 pm.
Right Avatar. For example, I disapprove of any religion teaching that Jesus was not the Christ, like Judaism and Islam, but I know that there are well meaning, good people in almost any religion, no matter how whacked. I also know that the Governments job is not to punish those who’s belief of lifestyle is distasteful to the majority.
It is so illogical:
Producing children out of wedlock with ZERO commitment from the father, and even the mother , is legal and much more common than polygamy. (Welfare babies, anchor babies, MISTAKE OUT OF WEDLOCK BABIES, aborted babies, and so on.) However Texas abducts the babies of polygamists who are devoted to their children and raising them with love. Unbelievable. (good thing Abraham didn’t live in Texas today, he, Sarah, and Hagar would be in Jail and Issac and Ishmael would be in state custody- oh wait a minute, were Hagar and Abraham married- I guess as long if it was out of wedlock, it would be OK today) 
Cavetrollhead Says:
23 May 2008 at 7:25 pm.
BTW Texas Health and Human services (or whoever),
Read this:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
This has been their religion for almost two hundred years. Oh yea, I forgot- it is OK if they are not married to produce a lot of children, but if they take a Religious Vow- put them in jail.
What planet am I living on? Has the human race abandoned reason?
Cavetrollhead Says:
23 May 2008 at 7:27 pm.
Does the first amendment only apply to the US constitution? I guess Texas may have to right but it is still illogical.
Cavetrollhead Says:
23 May 2008 at 7:27 pm.
I meant US congress.
Matt Says:
23 May 2008 at 7:28 pm.
YES
Matt Says:
23 May 2008 at 7:29 pm.
to the abandoning reason part
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.