Date: Fri, 18 Nov
2005 02:11:35 -0000
From: "thedesnoyers5" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: First off you are NOT alone!
First off you are NOT alone!
When the people fear their government,
there is tyranny; when the government
fears the people, there is liberty.
CRAWFORD v. WASHINGTON
SUPREME COURT RULES 9-0 On March 8,
2004, Supreme Court Rules That Hearsay
Evidence in Child Abuse/neglect and
Domestic Violence Cases Is Not Admissible.
Parents Have the Constitutional Right
to Confront Their Accuser under the
6th Amendment. DCF, the AAG and the
States Attorney must Now Comply with
the 6th Amendment in Child
Abuse/neglect and Domestic Violence
The "liberty interest of parents
in the care, custody, and control
of their children is perhaps the oldest
of the fundamental liberty interests"
recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Troxel v.Granville, 527 U.S. 1069
(1999). Moreover, the companionship,
care, custody, and management of a
parent over his or her child is an
interest far more precious than any
property right. May v. Anderson, 345
U.S. 528, 533, (1952). As such, the
parent-child relationship is an important
interest that undeniably warrants
deference and, absent a powerful countervailing
interest, protection. Lassiter v.
Department of Social Services, 452
U.S. 18, 27 (1981).
Holding: The Supreme Court in Kalina
v. Fletcher, 522 U.S. 118, 127- 29
(1997) and Antoine v. Byers &
Anderson, Inc., 508 U.S. 429, 432-
37 (1993), effectively overruled this
circuit's precedent in Babcock v.
Tyler, 884 F.2d 497, 502-03 (9th Cir.
1989) (holding that absolute immunity
for social workers extended to include
post- adjudication dependency proceedings).
Under Antoine and Kalina, a court
in determining whether absolute immunity
applies should look at the nature
of the officials' functions and then
determine whether those functions
enjoyed absolute immunity at common
law. Where Supreme Court authority
is clearly irreconcilable with prior
circuit authority, a three-judge panel
of this court and district courts
should consider themselves bound by
the intervening higher authority and
reject the prior opinion of this court
as having been effectively overruled,
even if the prior opinion had not
been expressly overruled by an en
Social Workers are NOT officiers of
the Court and do NOT have Immunity.
(To make this long statement Clear!)
TITLE 28--JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE
PART I--ORGANIZATION OF COURTS CHAPTER
21--GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABLE
TO COURTS AND JUDGES Sec. 453. Oaths
of justices and judges Each justice
or judge of the United States shall
take the following oath or affirmation
before performing the duties of his
office: ``I, ___ ___, do solemnly
swear (or affirm) that I will administer
justice without respect to persons,
and do equal right to the poor and
to the rich, and that I will faithfully
and impartially discharge and perform
all the duties incumbent upon me as
___ under the Constitution and laws
of the United States. So help me God.''