Texas Judge Delays Implementing High Court Ruling

05.30.2008 · Posted in Social

Barbara Walther delays implementing the return of the FLDS children to their parents.

She should be held in contempt by the TX Supreme Court and left in jail for two weeks.

She may not be CPS, but I did warn that there would be retaliation for the order to return the children.

Share on Facebook

Tags: abduction, children reunited, cps, flds, judge, parents, polygamist saga, Texas, yfz

Reality Check

The Trial court retains the power to issue orders to protect the children while the civil lawsuit to determine permanent custody continues. It does not matter if temporary custody is in the hands of the CPS or the parents the Trial Court retains juristiction over the children.

That is what the Texas Supreme Court explained in there decisions not to grant the emergency stay requested by CPS and not to issue a Mandamus order to the Appeals Court. The stay was not needed because the Trial Court retained juristiction. The trial court continues to have the power to order the parents to take, or not take, actions related to the parents.

The Texas Supreme Court also explained that the Laywers for the FLDS Parents argued that the Trial Court would retain these powers even if the Appeals Court order was allowed to stand. This argument was made to counter the claim by CPS that the emergency stay was needed to allow the state to continue to protect the children.

Everyone who read the opinions of the Supreme Court or FLDS attorneys or the Appeals Court should understand the lawsuit to take permanent custody of the children away from the parents and the trial courts authority to issue orders to the parents continues.

The only order of the Trial Court which was vacated by the Appeals court was the one giving CPS temporary custody of the children while the law suit to determine permanent continues.

The lawsuit to determine permanent custody continues as does the power of the Trial Court to issue orders to the parents of the childre.
Reality Check

The Trial court retains the power to issue orders to protect the children while the civil lawsuit to determine permanent custody continues. It does not matter if temporary custody is in the hands of the CPS or the parents the Trial Court retains juristiction over the children.

That is what the Texas Supreme Court explained in there decisions not to grant the emergency stay requested by CPS and not to issue a Mandamus order to the Appeals Court. The stay was not needed because the Trial Court retained juristiction. The trial court continues to have the power to order the parents to take, or not take, actions related to the parents.

The Texas Supreme Court also explained that the Laywers for the FLDS Parents argued that the Trial Court would retain these powers even if the Appeals Court order was allowed to stand. This argument was made to counter the claim by CPS that the emergency stay was needed to allow the state to continue to protect the children.

Everyone who read the opinions of the Supreme Court or FLDS attorneys or the Appeals Court should understand the lawsuit to take permanent custody of the children away from the parents and the trial courts authority to issue orders to the parents continues.

The only order of the Trial Court which was vacated by the Appeals court was the one giving CPS temporary custody of the children while the law suit to determine permanent continues.

The lawsuit to determine permanent custody continues as does the power of the Trial Court to issue orders to the parents of the childre.
pastoralmusings

Reality Check,
“The only order of the Trial Court which was vacated by the Appeals court was the one giving CPS temporary custody of the children while the law suit to determine permanent continues.”
That is the issue, is it not? The trial court ‘s decision to give CPS custody of the children was vacated, so the children should have been returned to the parents. Instead, the trial court delays implementing the ruling.
Did I miss something here?
Jason
pastoralmusings

Reality Check,
“The only order of the Trial Court which was vacated by the Appeals court was the one giving CPS temporary custody of the children while the law suit to determine permanent continues.”
That is the issue, is it not? The trial court ‘s decision to give CPS custody of the children was vacated, so the children should have been returned to the parents. Instead, the trial court delays implementing the ruling.
Did I miss something here?
Jason
pastoralmusings

This article seems to state that the return of the children has been delayed.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D910A2NG0
pastoralmusings

This article seems to state that the return of the children has been delayed.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D910A2NG0