New Hampshire lawmakers are finally going to investigate its corrupt family court system, at least sort of.
Through a House resolution, a special committee has been formed to hold four hearings in May on the subject.
The hearings are being held to take testimony about the court’s handling of cases, but as the committee head is already warning, they don’t want to hear about specific stories of being wronged by a judge in divorce and private custody cases. Instead, they want private citizens to essentially come – act like lawyers, and cite the state and constitutional laws family court judges are breaking. And — they will only have 5 minutes to “state their case.”
Apparently, the 30 or so bills that a handful of Republican lawmakers have introduced over the last couple of years aimed at reforming the courts is not sign enough to existing lawmakers that there is a major problem with the state’s family courts. Not to mention the transparent lobbying court bureaucrats including judges themselves and the endless sea of those who make money off its lawless ways continue to desperately wage against any reform efforts.
“The lady doth protest too much, methinks” – Hamlet, William Shakespeare.
The committee is also not exactly advertising the hearings either. Finding the dates of them at the risk of sounding trite, is like looking for a needle in the haystack.
Add to that, the many citizens who have written letters, testified about their private lives at televised hearings — and practically hit lawmakers over their heads with the reality that NH’s family court system is, in using the oft-used politically-correct sugar-coated word to describe the lawless system — “broken.”
Interestingly enough and perhaps especially telling is that most of the problematic family court judges are Democrats appointed by none other than former Gov. Maggie Hassan, now U.S. Senator Hassan, with a few others appointed by former Gov. Steven Lynch, another liberal who clearly also didn’t vet judges who are pro child trafficking to abusers. Lest not forget he was against parental notification for minors seeking abortions.
The same holds true with the NH family court’s gang of thieves, being so-called guardian ad litems, junk science therapists, and other shameless profiteers.
Some are even former Democrat state reps or contemporaneous Republican haters who proudly post their anti-Trump sentiment and pro-ultra left wing views on their social media accounts for everyone to see. Many of them even have naked conflicts of interests with the cast of rubber stampers who cycle children out the door to abusive parents and strip good ones of everything they own.
To be fair, the newly appointed special committee is bipartisan and appears to be made up of some new blood instead of the group of gatekeepers who were constantly running interference against bills that openly begged judges to follow due process laws, child abuse laws, and rules of evidence laws — although apparently the last one is officially optional in New Hampshire since the court decided to adopt itself a court rule or two allowing itself to wave fundamental rules of evidence. Yep — you read that right.
Here’s one of them. Rule 1.2 Waiver of Rules. “As good cause appears and as justice may require, the family division may waive the application of any rule, except where prohibited by law.”
And here’s the other one. Rule 2.2 Application of New Hampshire Rules of Evidence. “The New Hampshire Rules of Evidence do not apply to the actions listed above” — being basically everything New Hampshire’s family division does.
Can anyone say — unconstitutional.
Clearly, Manhattan DA Alvin Braggs would be a great fit for a NH Family Court judge.
The good news and news lawmakers will hopefully grasp is that rules can’t be used to override statutory law and those things called — civil rights. Since New Hampshire loves to use old, outdated case law to keep abuses running in the family court system, let us remind this newly appointed committee of the Supremacy Clause enshrined in the mother of all case laws.
It was first used in the 1796 case Ware v. Hylton, which established that constitutional rights supersede conflicting state law. It has since been carried over to countless court rulings across the nation including yes — in New Hampshire.
There have been published reports about New Hampshire judges promoting some 2011 court ruling that excuses them for not making rulings that are in the best interest of the child.
If all courts adopted such a precedent, courts across the land could clear the docket in a day. Rapists, child molesters, traffickers, could all go free on account that the higher court says so.
Who needs trials and evidence any way.
Clearly not the NH family courts.
Of course, there are so many pesty inconveniences.
There’s this, not so-difficult to find codified right in the very Live Free or Die’s own Constitution
that says judges will not serve as legal counsel in cases and yet — in New Hampshire, apparently they exclusively pick the witnesses in divorce and custody disputes — what many have complained is a preselected pool that wouldn’t dare bite the hand that feeds them.
A bank robber in New Hampshire should ask for a family court judge to preside over his or her case.
Judge: I deem the bank guilty of alienation for accusing you of robbing the bank. You get to keep the money.
The hearings on what appears to be the untouchable family court system are slated for May 2, 9, 16, and 23, from 9:30 to noon in LOB Room 206-208.