Investigative Journalism | Exposing What Lies Beneath
On April 28, 2025, Marc Fishman, fighting parental alienation and suspended visitation rights in a New York courtroom, faced significant challenges: no attorney, unreceived filings, and a judge potentially biased against him. His struggle highlights flaws in the family court system, which prioritizes procedure over the welfare of vulnerable parents and children.
The 1990s, often viewed as a prosperous decade, actually concealed significant systemic corruption characterized by privatization of justice and prisons, alongside the emergence of corporate cartels. These changes, fueled by political interests and military-industrial complex dynamics, blurred the lines between government, corporations, and crime, undermining democracy and public accountability.
The Silent Coup of the 1990s: How Privatization, ADR, and Drug Cartels Rewired American Power Read MoreOn May 8, 2025, a California court ruled in favor of Trish Miroth against Trinity County Child Protective Services, challenging unlawful child removal. The court rejected the County’s motion to dismiss based on the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, affirming federal jurisdiction in civil rights cases. This landmark decision empowers families against CPS overreach.
Miroth v. Trinity County: A Landmark Win for Families Fighting CPS Injustice Read MoreVeterans and first responders, who sacrifice for our safety, face unjust treatment in family court. Their service is misinterpreted as disqualification from parenthood, leading to custody loss. The system is biased, often favoring those who remain behind. Reform is essential to ensure justice protects rather than punishes those who serve.
No One Is Safe: How Family Court Punishes Our Heroes Read MoreThe Texas Senate’s passage of the “Three Strikes Law” aims to impose stricter penalties for custody interference. While Maryland’s courts favor cooperative parenting over accountability, advocates suggest a modified bill could emerge. Conversely, Virginia’s political landscape may support bipartisan child protection laws, potentially paving the way for similar measures.
Could a ‘Three Strikes’ Law for Custody Interference Pass in Maryland or Virginia? Read MoreThe Texas Senate passed Senate Bill 2794, enhancing penalties for repeated child custody interference, potentially categorizing the third offense as a felony. Discussion arises regarding the feasibility of similar laws in states like Maryland, with its progressive but lenient family court system, and Virginia, where bipartisan support for child protection is growing.
Could a ‘Three Strikes’ Law for Custody Interference Pass in Maryland or Virginia? Read MoreThe Texas Senate passed SB 2794, enacting a “Three Strikes” policy against child custody interference, imposing escalating penalties for repeat offenders. The law aims to protect children and custodial parents, combat parental alienation, and strengthen family law enforcement. Its passage signifies a commitment to uphold court-ordered custody agreements.
Texas Senate Unanimously Passes SB 2794, Introducing ‘Three Strikes’ Law for Child Custody Interference Read MoreOn May 1, 2025, in San Marcos, California, heavily armed individuals mistakenly identified as law enforcement attempted to abduct two schoolchildren without legal authority. Their mother, Giselle Smiel, exposed systemic failures in protecting parental rights and due process, highlighting the dangers of Alternative Dispute Resolution tactics disguised as justice, endangering children in schools.
No Warrant. No Order. Just Lies. — The San Marcos School Ambush Exposing Family Court Fraud Read MoreThe dismantling of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) would reveal judges’ and lawyers’ incompetence, forcing a return to real trials and constitutional standards. Courts would face an influx of lawsuits and require retraining. This shift could restore focus on individual rights, evidence, and due process, potentially revitalizing true justice in the legal system.
What Happens If Trump (Or Anyone) Tears Down the ADR System? Spoiler: Chaos, Panic, and a Much-Needed Reset Read MoreFamily court often prioritizes wealth over justice, creating socioeconomic bias against those who cannot afford legal representation or services. This leads to systemic disadvantages for low-income litigants, impacting their ability to advocate for their children’s best interests. Strategies exist for pro se litigants to combat these inequalities and seek fair treatment.
Justice for Sale: How Socioeconomic Bias Is Wrecking Families in Family Court Read More