14th Amendment violations in Family Courts

This is the reason 14th Amendment violations in Family Court are not overturn in Federal Courts. The Supreme Court expanded their powers in 1803 in Mulberry v Maddison. Giving themselves veto power regarding Constitutional issues over the other two branches of Government (Legislative and Executive). Then in 1819 in a Supreme Court ruling they gave themselves the power to “interpret” the Constitution. In 1833 the Supreme Court handled a case of water/land rights of an individual when the State was ruining his business. The Supreme Court said the “Bill of Rights” do not apply to the State, only Federal. Therefore, the State was allowed to trample people’s unalienable rights without legal recourse. The 14th Amendment was created around 1875 to graft the Bill of Rights into cases against the State. However, the 14th Amendment has a conditional clause in it, saying the State can violate your alienable and unalienable rights mention in the Constitution as long as they give you “due process.” A common trial. Eventually, the State started to violate people’s rights again, so the due process clause turned into a substantive due process clause. Meaning, not only a common trial, but a fair trial in all sense of the word. This expounded the meaning of 14th Amendment. However, the 11th Amendment says if you are a citizen of a State, you can not sue a different State. The Supreme Court said the 11th Amendment really means that a citizen can not sue any State without their written and express permission. This was later verified in two Supreme Court cases in 1950’ish. The Court cases created precedence (Stari Decisis). They smushed the names together to create what is knows today as the Rooker-Feldman Doctrine. This claims that if a State makes a decision, the looser can not relitigate a case in the Federal court to get a different outcome. So, the Federal Court says if a 14th Amendment violation was committed at the State level, the Federal Courts will not change the decision. They do this with 100% of the court cases since 1990. There are other doctrines called Domestic Relation Exemptions, ex-parte Young, Young exemptions that say the Federal Court will not hear issues of Domestic Relations (Family Court), custody, child support etc… The Supreme Court claims the only court who can hear 14th Amendment family court violations is the Supreme Court itself since Federal law does not litigate family matters. They claims it’s a State (only) issue and needs to stay at the State level. Make reasonable sense? Probably not since the government has been trying to gain power since its conception. Something that the Anti-Federalists warned us about.