CLOCK AND GAVELThere seems to be dispute as to what your rights are when you enter a family law courtroom. You really don’t have time to wait. You need to find what can help you now!

DURING my research I came across a groundbreaking method that could save your child from being put in the middle by the judge! We are going to reveal what this is tonight in this FREE webinar: You can REGISTER HERE now before all the seats are gone, AND learn how to help your attorney tell your judge to stop using your child! 

Here is what else I discovered during my research:

When attorneys are being trained, here is what I discovered they are being taught your rights are in Texas when CPS gets involved:

What are your Rights TYLA p5 What to Expect in Family Law Court 2003-2004 accessed 20140309

Seriously, it’s no wonder parents have been having such a difficult time in front of the judge and even with their own attorney! And it’s no wonder that parents all over the U.S. have felt like it’s been “open season” on them everywhere in divorce.

We really aren’t dealing with anything we haven’t dealt with before. The blacks dealt with it AND finally overcame constitutionally authorized behavior that was being supported by the Taney court where even when they lived in free-soil states they weren’t being protected by the due process they thought they had. A person only had to grab a free black person anywhere in America and run for a slave-soil state.

Certainly we can overcome unconstitutional behavior in our trial courts! We aren’t dealing with the color of one’s skin that is being judged, but the status of your relationship, your marital status! Where blacks were presumed to be slave status just by the color of their skin in slave states, a parent is presumed to not have any rights when they enter into a divorce or try to establish their paternity to their child.

Parent after parent challenging the unconstitutional actions of lower courts and even sometimes of their State Supreme courts only to be told by the United States Supreme Court that it is up to the states, and then leaving it that way are falling victim to allowing the states “to wallow in an increasingly warped and ultimately unacceptable…ideology” just as the Taney court did for a long period of time during the 1800s. Only this time it is unconstitutional behavior!

So what happened in 1849, when the case of Jones v. Van Zandt was argued by a constitutional attorney! “The great antislavery lawyer Salmon P. Chase, whom Lincoln would later appoint to replace Taney as chief justice, argued before the Court that the 1793 law not only exceeded Congress’s enumerated powers, but also violated several aspects of the Bill of Rights–by authorizing unreasonable bodily seizures (contra the Fourth Amendment), providing inadequate procedural safeguards (contra the Fifth Amendment due-process clause), and neglecting to give the alleged fugitive a free-soil jury (contra the Sixth Amendment). The Taney Slavocrat Court “brusquely swept aside these objections.” It would appear that Congress would continue to give slave masters carte blanche and not hold them to due process.

“The 1789 Northwest Ordinance Act and the 1820 Missouri Compromise Act were textbook examples of due process of law…they had been duly enacted in a manner that gave fair notice to everyone.” Yet the Taney slavocrat court continued to find ways to argue around this and allow slave owners to ignore due process. This eventually led to “Taney’s lead opinion in Dred Scott v. Sanford” decided in 1857 where the Taney court is claiming that they “had no constitutional power to exclude slavery from federal territory.” Bring us to modern day and how many times have you been told by someone in Congress, your Senator, your congressman that it is your State’s power to decide the details of your divorce and child custody?

Many argue that “Taney’s argument that Congress lacked power to ban slavery from the territories thus did violence to the Constitution’s text, structure, enactment history, and early implementation. Things did not improve for the chief when he recast his bald assertion in the language of due process.” While Taney was “upholding the Constitution,” luckily wise attorneys such as Chase saw through the incorrect ideology and knew that some corrections needed to be made in order to preserve the true nature and intent of the constitutional fundamental principles. Modern day misinterpretations of family law and the State’s authority by attorneys have indeed caused confusion and have set bad unconstitutional trends throughout the lower courts.

Eventually, a new chief justice was put in place and the ideas that Taney supported were no longer used as precedence and a new precedence was set — the constitution had been amended and now the wise thinking of Chase could set new precedence.

Although the Taney court was supported by the constitution in their rulings, the people never gave up. A new chief justice was put in his place. In fact, the one that was anti-slavery who argued in front of Taney mentioned above in favor of the constitutional due process protections. And even before this time, the people continued to spread their belief in due process applying to everyone (equal protection). They did this by believing in the idea, creating new free-soil states as well as policies that were against slavery, and through a civil war and amending the Constitution.

The students in our classes and those that attend our webinars are learning how to change their arguments so that they don’t get trapped in the wrong ideology that lead them to believe that they don’t have rights, and allow those in power to take advantage of them and their children.

Learn how to EMPOWER YOURSELF and take the AUTHORITY BACK IN YOUR LIFE by registering for this webinar now. Seats are strictly limited. I WANT TO EMPOWER MYSELF PLEASE SAVE ME A SEAT IN THIS FREE WEBINAR



Amar, Akhil. “America’s Constitution: A Biography.” 2005. pp260-263.

Justice Taney: