Mike Suttle Judge 11th Judicial Circuit, Lauderdale County, Alabama
This website is about the 11th Judicial Circuit Court in Lauderdale County, Alabama. In 2006 Mike Suttle determined - over a fit Parent's objection - that it was in a minor child's best interests to attend daycare 35 hours each week, rather than spend one-half of that time in a Parent's personal care. The Child had been accustomed to, and thriving, living half of her time with each parent. This due to a Tennessee judgment implemented solely to safeguard the child's right to a parent-child relationship with each parent. At daycare the Child was cooped up in a 12'x12' room watching videos with 15 other children for most of 35 hours each week. The 2006 judgment has bounced around on appeal being reversed twice by the Court of Civil Appeals, and once upheld by the state Supreme Court.
Now in 2012, the appeals process has not concluded. Mike Suttle has since retired. Gilbert P. Self is now the presiding judge.
Alabama Eleventh Circuit Court Judge Gilbert P. Self denied the constitutional argument all Alabama judgments are void for lack of subject matter jurisdiction for (1) violating a fit parent's fundamental liberty interest rights to First Amendment Freedom of Associations, and (2) the denial of substantive and procedural due process of the U.S. Constitution.
In October 2011 Alabama Justice Terry A. Moore of the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals released a written opinion that said, "The simple fact that a court has erroneously applied [Alabama] law does not render its judgment void."
In November 2011 the Alabama Supreme Court denied review. Although in June 2011 that Court issued an opinion Ex parte E.R.G. The E.R.G. opinion is the most powerful legal opinion in the United States on safeguarding "fit parents" fundamental rights. The fit parent standard using the same federal Constitutional case law relied upon in E.R.G., including the E.R.G. opinion, was fully argued in briefing to the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals. This case is now on appeal in the Supreme Court of the United States.
Questions Presented to the Supreme Court of the United States
"I. Does the U.S. Constitution supersede Alabama law with regard to safeguarding fundamental liberty interest rights of First Amendment Freedom of Associations?"
"II. Are Alabama judgments void for lack of substantive and procedural due process when they violate fundamental liberty interest rights of the First and Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution?"
Fit Parent Legal Standard
The Supreme Court of Alabama in Ex parte E.R.G. and D.W.G., quoting the Supreme Court of the United States, is clear the U.S. Constitution, "requires that a prior and independent finding of parental unfitness - by clear and convincing evidence - must be made before the court may proceed to the question of whether an order disturbing and limiting a parent's 'care, custody, and control' of his or her child is in that child's best interests."
In addition, the E.R.G. Court quotes a long line of law since 1923 from the Supreme Court of the United States including Justice Scalia's dissent in Troxel v. Granville that, "recognizes that the right of parents to make decisions regarding a child's care, control, education, health, and religion, as well as with whom the child will associate, is a fundamental right that arises "as an inherent consequence of the parent-child relationship independent of any case law, statute, or constitutional provision."
The Troxel Court said, "The Due Process Clause - of the U.S. Constitution 14th Amendment - does not permit a State (judge) to infringe on the fundamental right of parents to make child rearing decisions simply because a state judge believes a “better” decision could be made."
Why is the state of Alabama judiciary refusing to honor essential fundamental law safeguarded by the Constitution, which they have taken an oath to uphold and support?