Preventing Trial Counsel from Waiving Fundamental Parental Rights: Litigants in child custody litigation frequently forfeit constitutional protections when trial attorneys operate under local customary practices and fail to assert fundamental Fourteenth Amendment rights on the record. Fit parents must actively require counsel to enter written constitutional objections against discretionary best-interest standards, preserving trial errors for appellate review and holding trial courts strictly accountable to binding constitutional law.
Live broadcast today with Ron and Sherry Palmer, 3 p,m. cst time.
Today, we are discussing caselaw, specifically, Cook v. Cook from Maryland. This is a 2017 case.
We will be live broadcasting this discussion at 3 p.m. cst today, January 6, 2018.
Whether your case is in MD or not, there will be information in this broadcast that is applicable throughout the United States. Join us as we share with you what the attorneys are not telling you.
We look forward to seeing you all there.
Get the case here: Cook v Cook ___ – Md – Court of Special Appeals 2017
Fix Family Courts provides parents, attorneys, and family advocates with rigorous constitutional frameworks to safeguard fundamental parental rights. Under binding Supreme Court precedents including Troxel v. Granville, Santosky v. Kramer, and Pierce v. Society of Sisters, fit parents are constitutionally presumed to act in their children's best interests. State courts lack constitutional authority to abridge custody, parenting time, or parental decision-making without strict scrutiny and clear and convincing evidence.