Home Recommended Products Contact Us
Resources & Links
Fatherlessness Statistics
Child Support
Legal Resources
Search This Site
Bad Judges List
Free Templates
Restraining Orders
Judicial Abuse Stories
Father's Stories
Legal Help & Referrals
Constitutional Rights
Table of Contents
Terms & Conditions
Signup for Newsletter
Search Site

The state-of-the-art in what is best for children of divorce. Every parent, judge and family law attorney must view this video to save their children from the ravages of divorce.
Click Here to Learn More.


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                            Contact: Michael Galluzzo

October 25, 2006                                                                                            937-663-4505


A father of two children battling for equal time with them for over six years, Michael Galluzzo, has filed two Petitions for Writ of Certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court. Galluzzo filed in response to the ongoing deprivation of his, and a estimated 25 million other “non-custodial” parents’, constitutional rights.  Unlawful denial of parental rights has become standard procedure in many state family courts for decades in spite of Supreme Court rulings and the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution.

This constitutional challenge to Ohio custody statutes could apply in many states.  The authority of any state to deprive a fit parent of custody in a divorce without a finding of unfitness by a clear and convincing standard is not granted under the U.S. Constitution and many other clear U.S. Supreme Court rulings.  However, state courts have been ignoring this for decades.  We now know from over 200 scientific studies that being raised in a single parent home is very damaging to children compared to equal access to both parents.  Originally filed in April 2001, this case has worked its up way through the system. 

The Court has upheld the rights of parents to raise their children without undue interference from the state for the past 80 plus years.  In such cases as Stanley v. Illinois (1971), Santosky v. Kramer (1982), and Troxel v. Granville (2000).  Parental rights are paramount to freedom and the pursuit of happiness. The Equal Protection Clause under the Fourteenth Amendment does not allow the placing of citizens into artificially created separate classes (custodial and non-custodial), without a finding, by clear and convincing evidence, of unfitness of one of the parents.  Therefore these courts are acting unconstitutionally.

This case is the seminal case in a long history of U.S. Supreme Court fundamental parental rights cases that should properly establish constitutionally compliant procedures between suitable and fit parents in a divorce situation with children. The Court has addressed the rights of adoptive parents, grandparents, unwed parents, single parents, unfit parents, state agencies, and legal guardians but NOT divorced parents.  The ultimately critical, and unresolved, issue remaining is the determination of the rights of fit parents in a divorce situation.

# # #

Further Information and Background

A Petitions for Writ of Certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court is a request for the court to order a lower court to obey existing laws indicating their interpretation of these or actions are not lawful. The actual Petitions are now posted at PACEgroup.org along with additional information or you may contact Michael Galluzzo at magalluzzox@hotmail.com or at 937-663-4505.

Laws and individual orders against “fundamental” constitutional rights have a level of review called “strict scrutiny” applied.  See Santosky v. Kramer (U.S. SJC 1982).  To terminate (or even limit?)  parental rights, the state must prove allegations of parental neglect or misconduct by “clear and convincing evidence.”

In fact most family courts ignore these requirements and terminate one parent’s custody without cause thousands of times every day in the U.S. Many say this is because of the billions of dollars in federal incentives received by states to increase child support collections and many billions more in legal fees generated by custody battles.  “Shared Parenting” legislation, requiring a presumption of equal time with both parents, is being fought for in several states and is a trend likely to address this problem at the state level. A ruling by the U.S. SJC would accelerate this process and likely prevent the further harm of millions of children caught up in this government bureaucracy which has lost touch with the real needs of families and children and is still living in the 1950’s. 

Decades of scientific research including over 200 studies have proven children do much better when they have equal time with both parents by every measure. Many social pathologies like crime, mental illness, teen pregnancy, delinquency and others are greatly reduced, compared to children brought up in single parent homes with visitation.

Recently the Anna Nicole Smith case (Marshal v. Marshal U.S. SJC May 2006) also ruled that the federal courts must act as a check and balance by looking at these state cases. The U.S. SJC  stated that “the lower courts have been abusing the domestic relations exception” which puts divorce in the jurisdiction of the states. Family courts seem to have run off the tracks from this lack of oversight for decades.