Turner v. Rogers Turns 5 Years Old | What the Supreme Court did and didn’t say

Turner v. Rogers, 564 U.S. 431 is a case decided by the United States Supreme Court on June 20, 2011, that held that a state must provide safeguards to reduce the risk of erroneous Deprivation of Liberty ...

 End date: 2011 Docket number: 10 Citation: 564.
Lawless Family Courts: Jailing people for debt is Unconstitutional - A form of Extortion from Bob Norton on Vimeo.
Many states are jailing people to extort money from their friends and families. This is literally extortion as civil courts are not allowed to use civil contempt to punish, nor jail people who do not have the money. Learn how to protect yourself from unlawful jail time with a few words.

Turner v. Rogers, the Court was asked if deadbeat dads who fail to pay child support have a right to counsel when facing incarceration.

Lawless Family Courts: Constitutional Law Requires Treating Everyone Equally - Judges Don't Care from Bob Norton on Vimeo.

Sexism is rampant in family court, though not always the determining factor. Money generation almost always overrides this law. After illegal termination of one parents rights the litigation is on and everything you own, and could earn for up to 24 years is too. Honoring the 14th Amendment would mean granting equal time and custody in any case where both parents are fit, but that would not generate billions in federal kickbacks for all 50 state judicial systems - and they are now addicted to this money flow. The best interest of children will never get in the way of paychecks for their mostly unneeded jobs.

Turner v. Rogers: What the Court Did and Didn’t Say | ACS: 

By Rebekah Diller, deputy director of the Justice Program at the Brennan Center for Justice. This is a cross-post from the Brennan Center’s blog. Posted on June 21, 2011.

In a mixed result for the rights of indigent parents, the Supreme Court yesterday held that the year-long incarceration of a South Carolina man for failure to pay child support violated the Constitution because adequate safeguards had not been in place to ensure that his failure to pay was willful. However, the Court also ruled that parents facing jail time for failure to pay child support do not have a categorical right to a court-appointed defense attorney when the other parent is unrepresented.

The case, Turner v. Rogers, involved an appeal of an order finding Michael Turner in civil contempt because of his failure to pay child support. At the hearing, Mr. Turner had been unrepresented by counsel and had attempted to explain to the judge why he could not pay his debt. The judge did not make any finding as to Turner’s ability to pay the arrears and nonetheless ordered Turner to serve a year in prison.

U.S. Citizen Parent whose Son has been wrongfully retained abroad.

Greetings:

As a nurturing and loving father, and as a Nam Vet swore to defend the Constitution against "all enemies, foreign and domestic," I have been litigating since January 27, 2003, to protect my residual parental and visitation rights in accordance with a joint custody agreement mandated protected by Federal and Virginia Code, a Treaty, and U.S. & Virginia Constitutions--against the illegal anti-fathers rights policies of the U.S. State Dept., U.S. Dept of Justice, the Federal Court, and Virginia Courts.

Thus I have recently requested both the Governor and Legislature of Virginia, President Bush, and members of Congress to direct both the Attorney General of Virginia, and the Solicitor General of the United States to file a response to my Son's and my petition for certiorari to the United States Supreme Court,*(("*") indicates note located below), to compel compliance of both the Executive and Judicial Branches with the mandates of Congress and the General Assembly of Virginia.**

Obviously, the assuring of compliance with the legal mandates of Congress, and the General Assembly of Virginia, protection of the residual and visitation rights of all U.S. citizen fathers is one of general policy concerns affecting the rights of all fathers and not just a question of the illegal violation of my rights as a father in this specific litigation.

I note that I wrote the President beginning in January 2002, as to DOJ and State's obstructing my visitation rights as a father, and opposed the nomination and confirmation of Chief Justice John G. Roberts because he violated 18 U.S.C. Secs. 4, 371 and 1001, by making intentional false statements to Congress(see statement located below. See alsohttp://home.earthlink.net/~isidoror/***

Therefor the record confirm the fact that as a U.S. citizen parent whose Son has been wrongfully retained abroad in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1204, I have been placed in the worse position by the Executive and Judicial Branches of Federal Government because they do not permit my Son as a U.S. citizen return home to the U.S., or refuse to secure visitation as mandated by both Federal and State law.****

I stress that my son and my challenges to the violations of the Bush Administration, as well as the Federal and State Judiciary, is not based on any disrespect, but rather a belief in the limitations on government under our Constitution----because if the Bush Administration, and Federal and State judges, acting outside their jurisdiction and judicial capacity, can disregard the substantive rights of U.S. citizen fathers with impunity--as well as deny the ability to challenge their actions, then they have unlimited power and this in itself is a violation of the Constitution and the right of all citizens of the United States.*****

As has been stated in the past, "[u]nlimited power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it; and this I know, my lords, that where law ends, tyranny begins."Lord Chatham (William Pitt) to the British House of Lords in January 1770 (Emphasis added).

Therefor I request that you write the Attorney General of Virginia and the Solicitor General of the United States, requesting that they file a response briefs to the motion for a TRO/PI pending before Associate Justice Paul Stevens, since the Chief Justice is disqualified, so to the Courts of Virginia to secure my Son's visit to the U.S.A. with his father for his 2006 Summer and Christmas vacations, and to the petition for certiorari.

In closing as an experienced civil rights attorney who for the past 30 years has litigated against the abuse of authority by government officials, I know that there is no crueler tyranny than that which is exercised under cover of law, and with the colors of justice. Therefore my actions are also on behalf of all fathers who are unable to locate an attorney with the ability or strength to fight the violation of law judiciary acting outside of their jurisdiction.

I thank you beforehand for your prompt consideration.

Very truly yours,


Mr. Isidoro Rodriguez