From my own experience with the Juvenile Court the whole Child Welfare System and Family Courts are all about MONEY and who you have ties to,to manipulate in the back ground.
These commentaries are what's needed to wake up the masses. There needs to be an ongoing dialogue to keep the family court racketeering enterprise/association-in-fact in the forefront of social and political discussion. Now that the income taxes, and other taxes are being addressed and the Iranians have a number of giant holes in the ground, it's time to blast away with "bunker busters" to destroy the family court bunker, and bring attention to the American people about what's going down in these faux courts.
I’ve always said that most are too poor for justice. Only the rich and well connected get favorable judgements. I really did think “experts” were out with the reversal of the Chevron doctrine but the courts do as they please.
Has anyone read Justice Barrett’s stunning rebuke of Judges? It is required by the Judiciary Act of 1789 to follow the law. It’s in her opinion, Trump vs CASA, Inc. which came out today. Supreme Court now reaffirms that Judges(all Judges) must follow the law and specifically the US Constitution. Amazing she had to even say that in her opinion but this should be interesting. Activist Judges have no place in the Judiciary.
Absolutely agree—Barrett’s opinion in Trump v. CASA, Inc. is both stunning and necessary. The fact that a Supreme Court Justice had to remind lower courts that they are bound by the Constitution and the Judiciary Act of 1789 speaks volumes about how far things have drifted. We've seen for years now how “justice” is often for sale, especially in family and civil courts. The Chevron reversal was a good start, but without accountability for judges who disregard the law, the two-tiered system will continue. Let’s hope this opinion is used as a precedent to rein in judicial activism and restore equal justice under law—for everyone, not just the well-connected.
"ABA Model Rule 1.5(a) and (b) relate to the fees that lawyers can charge clients. Here's a brief overview:
Rule 1.5(a): A lawyer's fee shall be reasonable. The factors to be considered in determining the reasonableness of a fee include:
1. The time and labor required, the novelty and difficulty of the questions involved, and the skill requisite to perform the legal service properly.
2. The likelihood, if apparent to the client, that the acceptance of the particular employment will preclude other employment by the lawyer.
3. The fee customarily charged in the locality for similar legal services.
4. The amount involved and the results obtained.
5. The time limitations imposed by the client or by the circumstances.
6. The nature and length of the professional relationship with the client.
7. The experience, reputation, and ability of the lawyer or lawyers performing the services.
8. Whether the fee is fixed or contingent.
Rule 1.5(b): When the lawyer has not regularly represented the client, the basis or rate of the fee and expenses for which the client will be responsible shall be communicated to the client, preferably in writing, before or within a reasonable time after commencing the representation.
These rules aim to ensure that lawyers charge fair and reasonable fees, and that clients are informed about the basis and rate of those fees."
Yeah, but what's reasonable????? $100/hr., $250/hr., $350/hr., $500/hr. Did you know that top corporate lawyers in NYC and DC make over $5,000/hr.??? A couple of high profile NYC family law attorneys make upwards of $800/hr. Who is worth this kind of money? Nobody!!!! It's a shakedown racketeering scam of monumental proportions. Any lawyer that can't get a divorce done for less than $10,000 ($25,000 max in complicated financial cases) should be charged with ethics violations and disbarred for criminal theft by deception, fraud, fiduciary fraud, and general incompetence.
The Arizona Reform Model is, in my opinion, the greatest hope for real change. Get Family Courts back to making two fundamental determinations, and only two determinations: division of property and custody.
Thank you for bringing awareness to this. I’m sorry you both are having these experiences. I can relate and would love it if you could look at my case. I have everything in one streamlined document. If you’re interested, please let me know how to send it. 🙏❤️
The head of the household sets the direction, and his helper follows. This sets the house in order. The children see cooperation modeled.
However, once the state usurps children's right to a family life. They set the parents against eachother as equals. Incentivising discord to pay al the lawyers.
Children can't understand it.
You're right about "concept creep" too.
In England, the 1989 Children's Act seemed limited and sane as it was intended and written, but concept creep extended abuse and neglect so they now everything is practically both.
In the 2010s hundreds of children were trafficked into "care" step families with double Cinderella effect due to "risk of future emotional harm". Even the industry was protesting and raging against the bonuses paid to local authorities for irrevocably removing children from adequate homes.
Concept creep, lack of clarify, incentivising degeneracy of family, setting the natural order upside down "best interests of the child", rewarding divorce without fault.
That's why we've lost generations. Marriage strike is in full force. And many women never raise children supported by a loving head of household.
From my own experience with the Juvenile Court the whole Child Welfare System and Family Courts are all about MONEY and who you have ties to,to manipulate in the back ground.
Lots of manipulating going on, all so these crooks can enrich themselves.
These commentaries are what's needed to wake up the masses. There needs to be an ongoing dialogue to keep the family court racketeering enterprise/association-in-fact in the forefront of social and political discussion. Now that the income taxes, and other taxes are being addressed and the Iranians have a number of giant holes in the ground, it's time to blast away with "bunker busters" to destroy the family court bunker, and bring attention to the American people about what's going down in these faux courts.
I’ve always said that most are too poor for justice. Only the rich and well connected get favorable judgements. I really did think “experts” were out with the reversal of the Chevron doctrine but the courts do as they please.
Has anyone read Justice Barrett’s stunning rebuke of Judges? It is required by the Judiciary Act of 1789 to follow the law. It’s in her opinion, Trump vs CASA, Inc. which came out today. Supreme Court now reaffirms that Judges(all Judges) must follow the law and specifically the US Constitution. Amazing she had to even say that in her opinion but this should be interesting. Activist Judges have no place in the Judiciary.
Absolutely agree—Barrett’s opinion in Trump v. CASA, Inc. is both stunning and necessary. The fact that a Supreme Court Justice had to remind lower courts that they are bound by the Constitution and the Judiciary Act of 1789 speaks volumes about how far things have drifted. We've seen for years now how “justice” is often for sale, especially in family and civil courts. The Chevron reversal was a good start, but without accountability for judges who disregard the law, the two-tiered system will continue. Let’s hope this opinion is used as a precedent to rein in judicial activism and restore equal justice under law—for everyone, not just the well-connected.
"Every "family court " case makes perfect sense once you look at all of the $$$ moving around. "
https://youtube.com/shorts/RJlWbH-I9I0?si=hglw_UCZvs3cjV9r
https://youtube.com/shorts/r0dMs-jg9hs?si=8WEEyEKMUTPX3zgz
"ABA Model Rule 1.5(a) and (b) relate to the fees that lawyers can charge clients. Here's a brief overview:
Rule 1.5(a): A lawyer's fee shall be reasonable. The factors to be considered in determining the reasonableness of a fee include:
1. The time and labor required, the novelty and difficulty of the questions involved, and the skill requisite to perform the legal service properly.
2. The likelihood, if apparent to the client, that the acceptance of the particular employment will preclude other employment by the lawyer.
3. The fee customarily charged in the locality for similar legal services.
4. The amount involved and the results obtained.
5. The time limitations imposed by the client or by the circumstances.
6. The nature and length of the professional relationship with the client.
7. The experience, reputation, and ability of the lawyer or lawyers performing the services.
8. Whether the fee is fixed or contingent.
Rule 1.5(b): When the lawyer has not regularly represented the client, the basis or rate of the fee and expenses for which the client will be responsible shall be communicated to the client, preferably in writing, before or within a reasonable time after commencing the representation.
These rules aim to ensure that lawyers charge fair and reasonable fees, and that clients are informed about the basis and rate of those fees."
Yeah, but what's reasonable????? $100/hr., $250/hr., $350/hr., $500/hr. Did you know that top corporate lawyers in NYC and DC make over $5,000/hr.??? A couple of high profile NYC family law attorneys make upwards of $800/hr. Who is worth this kind of money? Nobody!!!! It's a shakedown racketeering scam of monumental proportions. Any lawyer that can't get a divorce done for less than $10,000 ($25,000 max in complicated financial cases) should be charged with ethics violations and disbarred for criminal theft by deception, fraud, fiduciary fraud, and general incompetence.
The Arizona Reform Model is, in my opinion, the greatest hope for real change. Get Family Courts back to making two fundamental determinations, and only two determinations: division of property and custody.
https://rumble.com/v6va1il-arizona-today-23-june-2025-state-senator-mark-finchem.html
And make sure the judges enforce their orders - consistent with THE BILL OF RIGHTS.
Novel concepts, I know.
I wouldn't be surprised if we get an A.I. out of big tech that dramatically blows human lawyers out of the market.
Such that they all use it 99% of the time.
Reducing their labor by 10x.
Thank you for bringing awareness to this. I’m sorry you both are having these experiences. I can relate and would love it if you could look at my case. I have everything in one streamlined document. If you’re interested, please let me know how to send it. 🙏❤️
Sure, I can take a look. Shoot me an email. mikethunderphillips@gmail.com
Parental alienation is an effect of family court.
The head of the household sets the direction, and his helper follows. This sets the house in order. The children see cooperation modeled.
However, once the state usurps children's right to a family life. They set the parents against eachother as equals. Incentivising discord to pay al the lawyers.
Children can't understand it.
You're right about "concept creep" too.
In England, the 1989 Children's Act seemed limited and sane as it was intended and written, but concept creep extended abuse and neglect so they now everything is practically both.
In the 2010s hundreds of children were trafficked into "care" step families with double Cinderella effect due to "risk of future emotional harm". Even the industry was protesting and raging against the bonuses paid to local authorities for irrevocably removing children from adequate homes.
Concept creep, lack of clarify, incentivising degeneracy of family, setting the natural order upside down "best interests of the child", rewarding divorce without fault.
That's why we've lost generations. Marriage strike is in full force. And many women never raise children supported by a loving head of household.