SB 107 and Custody Jurisdiction
There’s this invoice, SB 107, circulating in California.
If it passes, it should have an effect on CUSTODY rights of fogeys in different states.
Kidnapping Hypothetical
Hypo: Mother and Dad have custody orders in Texas, granting Mother sole custody of 10 yr outdated minor, who has sexual identification confusion. The Texas courts have already discovered Dad unfit. Dad doesn’t care about minor little one, he simply doesn’t wish to pay little one assist.
If SB 107 passes, Dad can escape these orders and take minor little one to California for “gender affirming care”.
Dad would find yourself with sole custody, although Texas has already discovered him unfit! SB 107 would enable California to IGNORE Texas orders, and make new orders so long as minor is right here for “gender affirming care”.
“Gender affirming care” contains sterilizing puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and trans surgical procedures.
SB 107 Permits Dad and mom to Violate Custody Orders If For “Gender Affirming Care”
The modifications to UCCJEA, proposed by SB107, will enable Dad to violate the Texas custody order by taking minor little one to California for “gender affirming care”.
In different phrases, parental rights in ALL 50 states (not simply California) will likely be stripped!
Senate Invoice 107
Learn Senate Invoice 107 right here.
Senator Scott Wiener launched SB 107 to show California right into a “refuge state for transgender kids”.
Some states have banned minors from receiving “gender affirming care”, and different states like Texas have enacted legal guidelines labeling these therapies as little one abuse. Learn Texas Legal professional Common Ken Paxton’s 13-page assertion explaining why he thinks trans medication and mastectomies on wholesome minors violate Texas little one abuse statutes.
Jurisdictional points are a nightmare in litigation. SB 107 is a harmful invoice that can allow and encourage predators and kidnappers to defy custody orders.
UCCJEA
Let’s discuss concerning the UCCJEA, the Uniform Little one Custody and Jurisdiction Act. 49 states and DC have adopted it. (Massachusetts has not).
The aim of the UCCJEA is to offer a uniform legislation concerning jurisdiction in little one custody circumstances.
As you all properly know, legal guidelines differ in all 50 states. Thus, relying on which state you’re in, you might have totally different outcomes as a result of the legal guidelines are totally different.
Are you able to think about if custody litigants can simply flee a custody order from a state and go to a brand new state? Think about all of the kidnapping of kids in divorce/separation circumstances!
The entire goal of the UCCJEA is to stop in opposition to the sort of abuse.
UCCJEA Determines Which State has the Energy to Make Custody Orders
The UCCJEA is about jurisdiction. It specifies which court docket ought to determine a custody case, not how the court docket ought to determine the case.
Underneath UCCJEA, Courts Should Implement Custody Orders of Different Courts
The UCCJEA requires household legislation courts round this nation to implement custody and visitation orders that have been entered in different states. This prevents mother and father from “kidnapping” their kids to flee custody orders entered of their state.
You probably have a toddler custody order from Los Angeles County, California, this order continues to be enforceable in all places. Except we’ve got one other civil conflict, different state courts MUST legally implement legitimate custody orders entered in all different states.
Basically, underneath UCCJEA, “Dwelling State” of Little one Will get to Make Orders
Basically, the house state of the kid is the place he/she has resided inside the previous 6 months.
Underneath the UCCJEA, the “house state” will get to make orders.
There are in fact exceptions, comparable to in “momentary emergency” conditions, or the place circumstances come up the place there is no such thing as a clear “house state”.
SB 107 Will Amend the CA Household Code, Permitting California to Be “Dwelling State” to Make Orders
Underneath SB 107, California turns into the “house state” with preliminary little one custody jurisdiction if a toddler is right here for gender affirming care.
See Paragraph 4 of the 8/30/2022 Senate Flooring Analyses
4) Offers that the presence of a kid on this state for the aim of acquiring gender-affirming well being care or gender-affirming psychological well being care is enough to grant a court docket on this state the jurisdiction to make an preliminary little one custody willpower for the kid.
SB 107 Creates a “Momentary Emergency Scenario” for California to Assert Jurisdiction
Paragraph 5 of the 8/30/2022 Senate Flooring Analyses:
5) Offers {that a} court docket of this state has momentary emergency jurisdiction over a toddler if the kid is current within the state as a result of the kid has been unable to acquire gender-affirming well being care or gender-affirming psychological well being care.
This implies California courts will likely be given “momentary emergency jurisdiction” over any little one who lives in or travels to California, permitting them to obtain dangerous interventions with out parental consent.
This extreme authorities overreach violates federal legislation concerning jurisdiction over custody issues, in addition to the legal guidelines of the 49 different states! It can mainly eliminate the UCCJEA so long as it’s “gender affirming care!”
Extraordinarily unconstitutional!
The Horrors of SB 107
A authorized evaluation from Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) explains:
SB 107 violates parental rights protected by the U.S. Structure by giving California courts the power to strip mother and father who reside in one other state of their parental rights if their little one travels to California to acquire gender transition procedures – together with dangerous puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and irreversible surgical procedures. It additionally denies mother and father the fitting to have entry to their little one’s medical info.
ADF goes on to elucidate totally different eventualities the place kids and households may very well be harmed by the invoice:
- An unfit mum or dad about to lose custody may journey to California with the kid, give the kid puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones, and in doing so win custody underneath SB 107, even when the home-state court docket has already entered judgment on the case.
- Dad and mom whose little one visits a relative in California may lose custody of their little one without end if the relative persuades the kid to determine as a special gender throughout the go to.
- Dad and mom of kids who by no means journey to California may very well be denied medical details about their little one if the kid obtains puberty blockers from a physician in California through telemedicine.
Watch the Listening to on SB 107
SB 107 Asm. Listening to to Make CA a Sanctuary for Minor Who Need Trans-Medicine/Surgical procedure
Analysis Exhibits 80-95% Gender Dysphoria is Momentary/Gender Affirming Care Will increase Threat for Suicide
The American School of Pediatricians’ discovered that 80 to 95 p.c of kids that suffer from gender dysphoria will finally re-identify with their organic intercourse. The Heritage basis additionally carried out a examine which discovered elevated entry to gender “affirming” care doesn’t enhance psychological well being outcomes. It solely will increase a toddler’s threat for suicide.
De-Transitioner Chloe Cole Testifies In opposition to SB 107
Chloe Cole, a 17-year-old detransitioner, spoke out in opposition to Scott Wiener’s California invoice SB107.
Right here is her testimony.
Transcript of Chloe Cole’s Testimony
My identify is Chloe Cole. I’m 18 and my story just isn’t hyperbole. Beginning across the age of 12, I started to imagine that I used to be transgender. This perception was not natural. All of the media I consumed as a child confirmed me how silly and susceptible being a lady was. All of the sexualized pictures of ladies gave me an unrealistic expectation of womanhood. I spent numerous time on-line and shortly noticed all of the reward popping out as trans acquired on Instagram and different social media. I used to be a bit awkward in class and had some hassle making buddies. Like many dysphoric kids, I additionally endure from a wide range of psychological well being situations, so I simply fell prey to the narrative that if I felt totally different and didn’t wish to be a extremely sexualized lady, that I should be a boy.
I obsessed over changing into a boy. I believed that each one of my insecurities and nervousness would magically disappear as soon as I transitioned. The psychological well being professionals didn’t attempt to dissuade me of this delusional perception. I used to be fast-tracked into medical transition after I used to be identified with dysphoria. In California, a toddler can choose their gender identification and a care supplier questioning that might be thought of conversion remedy. This wasn’t a misdiagnosis, it was mistreatment.
“Nobody explored why I didn’t wish to be lady.”
My mother and father have been instructed that the choices have been transition or suicide. They complied as a result of they weren’t provided every other therapy answer for my misery. My distraught mother and father wished me alive, in order that they listened to my docs. I used to be positioned on puberty blockers, testosterone after expressing my gender dysphoria to my therapist and I used to be accepted for a double mastectomy all by the age of 15. Nobody explored why I didn’t wish to be lady.
Increasingly children are falling for the false promise of happiness in the event that they transition. Gender clinics within the US are turning a blind eye to European nations, who’re pumping the brakes on this experiment on youth.
Who right here actually believes that, as a 15-year-old, I ought to have had my wholesome breasts eliminated or that it ought to’ve been an possibility? When the CDPH acquired lower than 300 reviews of individuals getting hospitalized on account of vaping, San Francisco banned vape merchandise that very same yr, so I do know that you simply care concerning the well being of kids, but you’re permitting docs all around the state to take away the wholesome breasts of kids.
What number of extra kids’s our bodies will likely be destroyed earlier than you really hear? What’s the candy spot? 100? 200? 1000?
“SB107 will open the flood gates for confused kids like me to get the gender interventions that many so remorse. I’m the canary within the coal mine.”
If Handed, SB 107 Will Assault Rights of Dad and mom in ALL 50 States
Matthew McReynolds, a senior lawyer with the Pacific Justice Institute, says it greatest in his letter opposing SB 107.
SB 107 “takes a flying leap over the precipice,” McReynolds defined. “Truly declaring that it’s going to welcome and shield kidnappers—together with mother and father who’ve been adjudicated as unstable and unfit to care for his or her kids—so long as the grownup absconding with the kid says they’re doing so to place the kid into gender-hormone remedy or another, Orwellian gender-affirming care.”
“Of all of the implications famous above, the final (Part 7 of the Invoice) is essentially the most potent and essentially the most egregious. This
provision creates an exception to kidnapping legal guidelines that’s past the pale even in progressive California. In its overzealousness to punish states like Texas, this Invoice will as an alternative empower predators.
“SB 107 could be the most brazen assault on basic parental rights within the historical past of this state,” McReynolds warned. “This isn’t a recreation, a spoof, or a joke. Households who thought they’d escaped California won’t be secure if this invoice is enacted. It’s time for residents to name their legislators en masse to allow them to know they are going to be swept out of workplace this November if this invoice passes.”
If SB 107 Passes, California Will Have Jurisdiction Over Kids in ALL 50 States; Litigation All over the place
That is completely loopy. SB 107 doesn’t simply erase the rights of California mother and father. Parental rights in ALL states will likely be affected.
California Household Council President Jonathan Keller referred to as SB 107 “one of many gravest threats to parental rights lately.”
Keller stated if the invoice is signed, “California ought to brace for lawsuits. Different states’ Attorneys Common won’t sit idly by as California steals kids from mother and father who don’t need them sterilized with these trans-treatments.”
Implore Governor Newsom to Veto SB 107
Please share this on Twitter and social media. Implore Newsom to veto this harmful invoice. Name him at 916-445-2841!
Share on Twitter!
/cloudfront-us-east-2.images.arcpublishing.com/reuters/NV2GMCZORRMXNFU4LMIIPPUNWU.jpg)
