Family Court Reform

If you would like to know more about the family court, than you know already, please feel free to call. I am an author on marriage and divorce. Historically, family courts are unconstitutional. I speak with many people around the world on this subject because of my book. This is why. A quick little history lesson. 

Marriage and divorce was legislated through the ecclesiastical courts in England from its conception till 1857. Caroline Norton, a well known poet and writer petitioned Parliament for the right to divorce her husband (and sued), and custody reform. Parliament agreed but had to take the jurisdiction of divorce away from the Church of England to do that. That was the Matrimony Act Clause of 1857. They gave women the right to divorce and granted all young children to the mother. This is a doctrine both in England and the United States knows as the Younger Years Doctrine. This doctrine was exchanged later for the Best Interest of the Child Standards. 

This is where I come in. I am a biblical writer on divorce. Marriage is no longer handled by religion as a sacrament, but through civil courts as a contract. This is happening all over the world in the past 150 years. Family Courts in America are unconstitutional for several reasons. All stemming from the family court reform in England in 1857. Divorce was legislated through the courts of equity. This was based on the courts of chancery. Courts of chancery were considered the “keeper of the King’s conscience” and given his supremacy to decide over matters of discretion. We give family court judges the same legislative powers and call them discretion as well. People went to the King to override common-law court decisions that the people felt were unfair. When the King did this, it was justified as he had all the power. He could not be overruled. 

In the same way, family court was designed in America in 1910 by the federal courts to give judge’s unpardonable decisions. The only way a court would override a lower courts decision in Family Courts is if it shocked the conscience. Since Family court judges have unlimited powers, case law and constitutional rights do not apply. DCF and CPS is based on these cake courts of equity considered to be the family division. 

The Constitution guarantees juries for matters of $20 or more. Divorce was taken out of our civil courts to avoid this very right. 

England realized that having divorce and custody litigated through courts of equity were problematic at best. Therefore, from 1857 to 1875 (20 short years) England created Acts that morphed common-law courts with courts of equity. As of 1875, courts of equity no longer exist in England. But family courts in America are only growing. We need to follow England’s leading and disband courts of equity all together. Common law needs to be legislated into family court, bringing back the rule of law into these courtrooms. 

It was a mistake to create courts of equity. Courts of equity were only suppose to be an extension of the King’s supremacy. 

Michael 
760-212-2406