Right To Privacy – Part 2

“Where you find the laws most numerous, there you will find also the greatest injustice.” -- Arcesilaus

“Even when laws have been written down, they ought not always to remain unaltered.” -- Aristotle

----------------------------------

Legal Arguments:

• The Alimony Statue is Within the Zone of the Right of Privacy

There is no common law right to alimony. Pacheco v. Pacheco, 246 So.2d 778 (Fla. 1971). Alimony is merely a statute, part of Chapter 61 Fla. Stat.. See also Cornelius v. Cornelius, 382 So.2d 710 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979). Quite simply, as a statute it must conform to the constraints set forth in the Florida Constitution. This would not be the first time a provision of Chapter 61 was found to impermissibly infringe the Fla. Const. Right of Privacy. See Richardson v. Richardson, 766 So. 2d 1036 (Fla. 2000) ( § 61.13 (7) Fla. Stat. is facially unconstitutional as it violates Art. I § 23, Fla. Const., Right of Privacy).

§ 61.08 et al Fla. Stat., alimony provisions are part of the Fla. Stat. titled Chapter 61 “Dissolution of Marriage.” As such they regulate the personal decision of Floridians to divorce, i.e. dissolve their Marriage. The alimony provisions are written within that privacy-protected zone of divorce.

• Article I. § 23, Florida Constitution. Right of Privacy

N. Fla. Women's Health & Counseling Servs., Inc. v. State, 866 So. 2d 612, 635 (Fla. 2003) is controlling on the Right of Privacy. It states that a statute that infringes the fundamental right of privacy is presumptively unconstitutional unless the state proves a compelling state interest minimally applied and that the statute in fact furthers that interest.

Winfield v. Division of Pari-Mutual Wagering, 477 So2d 544,548 (Fla. 1985). ( See also N. Fl. Women’s Health 866 So.2, 620) describing the far-reaching impact of the Florida amendment:

“The citizens of Florida opted for more protection from governmental intrusion when they approved article I, section 23, of the Florida Constitution. This amendment is an independent, freestanding constitutional provision, which declares the fundamental right to privacy. Article I, section 23, was intentionally phrased in strong terms. The drafters of the amendment rejected the use of the words ‘unreasonable’ or ‘unwarranted’ before the phrase ‘governmental intrusion’" in order to make the privacy right as strong as possible. Since the people of this state exercised their prerogative and enacted an amendment to the Florida Constitution which expressly and succinctly provides for a strong right to privacy not found in the United States Constitution, it can only be concluded that the right is much broader in scope than that of the Federal Constitution.”

INTERESTING READING:
* Presumption of jurisdiction? At what point in time was the Florida legislature granted or given jurisdiction over our marriages? Why does the legislature and the courts assume they have jurisdiction over our marriages? Perhaps this has something to do with the legal argument of "presumption".

LEGAL INFORMATION AND RESEARCH CORNER:
* Meta-Index for U.S. Legal Research

EXAMPLES SHOWING THAT JUDGES CAN MAKE MISTAKES TOO:
* Delaware County Town Justice Agrees To Leave Office
* Judges as Criminals

Right To Privacy - Part 1

At his Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing in October, 1991.....

SEN. PAUL SIMON [former Democratic of Illinois, now deceased]: …do you consider the right of privacy a fundamental right?

JUDGE CLARENCE THOMAS. Senator, to my knowledge, the Supreme Court, no majority has used the ninth amendment to establish as the basis for a right. Of course, it was used by Justice Goldberg and by Justice Douglas in Griswold. With respect to the approach that I indicated that I thought was the better approach, it was Justice Harlan's approach. But with that said, my bottom line was that I felt that there was a right to privacy in the Constitution, and that the marital right to privacy, of course, is at the core of that, and that the marital right to privacy in my view and certainly the view of the Court is that it is a fundamental right.

---------------------------

At the Federal level, the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that a citizen's Right to Privacy is a fundamental constitutional right, especially in the privacy-protected zone of "personal decisions relating to marriage", and can only be infringed if government officials can clearly demonstrate a "compelling state interest" applied in the least intrusive manner.

For instance, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Loving v. Virginia (388 U.S. 1, 12, 87 S. Ct. 1817) in 1967, Zablocki v. Redhail (434 US 374) in 1978, and again in Planned Parenthood v. Casey (505 U.S. 833) in 1992, "Our law affords constitutional protection to personal decisions relating to marriage."

The decision of a Floridian to dissolve their marriage (Dissolution of Marriage) is a personal decision relating to marriage.

The State of Florida is not permitted to intrude upon these fundamental Federal and State Constitutional Rights without proving a compelling state interest is applied in the least intrusive manner and that the interest is substantially furthered by the legislation, i.e. strict scrutiny analysis.

The State of Florida does not mandate that all Floridians who exercise their fundamental Right to Privacy of a “personal decision relating to marriage’, i.e. to dissolve their marriage, be mandated forever to support their former spouses nor does it require married spouses to support their spouses to the “lifestyle of the marriage” as it mandates spouses dissolving their marriage.

A “personal decision relating to marriage”, i.e. to get married, stay married or to dissolve a marriage, is a recognized Federal and State Liberty Interest--a fundamental Right to Privacy.

INTERESTING READING:
* The Right to Privacy Warren and Brandeis, Harvard Law Review, Vol. IV December 15, 1890
* Does the Constitution Contain a Right to Privacy? A libertarian’s point of view.
* Privacy.org - Privacy.Org is the site for daily news, information, and initiatives on privacy.

LEGAL INFORMATION AND RESEARCH CORNER:
* The Virtual Chase – a good resource for various types of information gathering.

CASE LAW USED IN SUPPORT OF ABOLISHING ALIMONY:
* N. Fla. Women's Health & Counseling Servs., Inc. v. State, 866 So. 2d 612, 635 (Fla. 2003). There is no compelling state interest to validate the alimony statute.

EXAMPLES SHOWING THAT JUDGES CAN MAKE MISTAKES TOO:
* Judge banned from court
* A System of Injustice

Reader Comments

Editor’s note:
The text has been slightly edited for readability. The content contained herein expresses one person’s views and are not necessarily those of this blog. Opposing views are welcome and will be posted if presented in good taste and with factual substantiation.

This blog is concerned primarily with alimony (spousal support) related items and not child support. In that the two are pretty much entwined, comments submitted by readers should be focused predominantly on alimony and not on child support. Gender bashing will not be permitted.
________________________

Divorce and divorce laws are turning marriage and family life into a misery.

Child support (child maintenance) is becoming an industry. Mothers universally have more chances of getting child custody AND the money for the children. As a result fathers loose their children, loose their money and are getting bankrupted.

If mothers loved their children so much AND also wanted equal rights with men, WHY DON'T THEY TAKE UP EQUAL RESPONSIBILITY? Why don't they go to work to take care of their children.

When my DAD lost work, he took a bicycle and went looking for work. He didn't sue Mom. When I need money to support my family, I look for employment. I read the appointment column. I don't sue my wife and try to take my children with me nor do I seek an increase every time my partner earns more.

In U.S.A. war veterans return home to get arrested for non-payment of arrears. They are left to face a REAL battle at home!!. The US is spending approx $ 46 billion OF TAX PAYERS money due to broken families and more would be needed in future.

Just look at U.S.A:
U.S.A. is spending $ 46 Billion every annum on programs caused due to broken families. Who's going to fix it ?

The great "good news" is that India, China and Asia in general is following !!

Divorce is NO LONGER an American or western phenomenon. It is universal.
(a) Child custody and hence child support favoring the mom,
(b) Men loosing their beloved children and most of their assets to wife.
(c) The magic domestic violence bills are becoming universal!!

Divorces are soaring in China. In Japan women are just waiting for their husbands to retire so that they can divorce them and get a good share of their retirement money!! "Till pay day - do - us - part..." :-((
Divorce taking deadly toll on senior men

Birth rates are falling across the democratic world as marriage and child bearing are no longer pleasure. They are becoming a pain - due to women using legal loopholes to make money out of a system. This will have a civilization impact.

God save us all !!

Vinayak

More at :

http://batteredmale.blogspot.com/
http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-Y2MTaSA0RLDVTunp3KQgKh0-
http://my2cents.rediffblogs.com/

http://spaces.msn.com/members/Vinayak123/
http://s2.phpbbforfree.com/forums/dowry-forum-1.html
http://phpbb-host.com/phpbb/viewforum.php?f=2&mforum=dowry

http://groups.google.com/group/DLMI?lnk=li
http://groups.google.com/group/DivorceCases?lnk=li
http://groups.google.com/group/DivorceFAQ?lnk=li

Gender Bias - Courts

“... ours is a sick profession marked by incompetence, lack of training, misconduct and bad manners. Ineptness, bungling, malpractice and bad ethics can be observed in court houses all over this country every day ... these incompetents have a seeming unawareness of the fundamental ethics of the profession.”
--Chief Justice Warren Burger

This blog makes no attempt to polarize genders, as both are susceptible to the family law intrusion into your lives. To maintain the adversarial nature of proceedings, the courts typically portray women as the party needing support and preferential treatment. Who wouldn’t side with a Mom with children? It’s natural for them to use this public reaction to their advantage. But this blog isn’t gender oriented in its intent even though the system appears to side in favor of the women.

Read this report on Gender Bias in the courts:

Traditionally, men have borne the responsibility of paying alimony, but that is not necessary in today’s society. With women enjoying the benefits of equality and parity in the workplace, their income can often be greater than that of the men. This exposes them to the probability that the burden of alimony payments will be placed on them instead.
Women have reached an almost equal parity with men and have the same opportunity to become financially independent. When this situation exists, the shoe is on the other foot and alimony judgments (if applied on a gender neutral basis) can work to their detriment. This will occur even more in the future as the parity difference diminishes.

INTERESTING READING:
* Setting Up For Marital Bliss Or Preparing For A Divorce. Divorce rate is up in the Marines as many get married for all the wrong reasons.

* 4 Feminist Myths about Domestic Violence. There are two sides to every story.
* The Federal Bureau of Marriage? The very agencies asked to promote healthy marriages have for decades been entrenched in the divorce and child-support system, which depends on the breakup of marriages.

LEGAL INFORMATION AND RESEARCH CORNER:
* If you are going to represent yourself in court or going to be on trial, it will be a great help to know what to expect and how to conduct yourself. “Represent Yourself In Court” is an excellent reference book.

* Legal Information Institute. Go down the list until you find Family Law.

CASE LAW USED IN SUPPORT OF ABOLISHING ALIMONY:
* Connor v. Southwest Florida Regional Medical Center, Inc., 668 So. 2d 175 (Fla. 1995). The Florida Supreme Court ruling in abrogating the doctrine of necessaries.

EXAMPLES THAT JUDGES CAN MAKE MISTAKES TOO:
* Another Judge, Another Screw Up. And the judge throws in a little gender bias against women also.

Broken System

The system is broken and needs to be fixed. The way the alimony laws with lifetime payment provisions are being applied by judges is destroying the fabric of the family structure in our society. The rationales for the present laws are gone and they need to be abolished.

These articles are typical of how a law that once may have served a purpose has gone awry:
The Politics of Family Destruction
Daytona Friends Jailing

This is a great American tragedy that exists in the US and yet goes almost totally unreported by and large. Recently, people and governments rallied around one person’s rights, in the Terri Schaivo case, in sympathy and in support of violating the “Right to Privacy” Constitutional guarantee of family decisions by the husband. Yet the courts have held that the government couldn’t intrude upon those “Rights to Privacy” in family decisions. In millions of divorces, the government legal system invades these same “Rights to Privacy” where the burden of lifetime alimony, in cases where there is no “compelling state interest, minimally applied,” is placed on the spouse.

INTERESTING READING
* Insight into the judiciary by Chief Justice John F. Malloy. The Fraternity: Lawyers and Judges in Collusion

* An example of what can go on in family courts. Bill of Address Seeks to Remove Controversial Chief Justice Margaret Marshall.* Virginia Declares War on Deadbroke Dads – Mislabeled Deadbeat Dads are under the gun again.

LEGAL INFORMATION AND RESEARCH CORNER
* LexisNexis – Zimmerman Guide for backgrounds involving different cases.

CASE LAW USED IN SUPPORT OF ABOLISHING ALIMONY
* Read this recent ruling by the Florida 4th District Court of Appeals with Chief Judge J.C. Farmer concurring specially. It shows the court's attitude towards permanent alimony.

Abolish Alimony Groups

There are a lot of support groups involved with child-support and custodial rights activities. However, there are almost none who are fighting to abolish the present alimony laws.Foremost in the groups leading the charge against the statues regulating dissolutions is the Alliance For Freedom From Alimony, Inc. (Alliance) along with their legal arm The Center For Liberty And Privacy (CFLAP). (See their websites on the menu.)

Abolish Alimony.org is essentially the chronicles of one person’s crusade against the unjust alimony statutes and gives a timeline of all the documents filed in that case. He is not an attorney and does not have a legal background. Everything he has accomplished has been a result of his own research efforts and with the guidance of the two sites mentioned above.

INTERESTING READING:
* Here a story about an attorney filing bankruptcy to avoid paying alimony. It should be a good story to follow.

* You'd never know domestic abuse hurts men also. A 1998 Department of Justice study reported that of 2.3 million victims of domestic violence, 36 percent or 835,000 are men. Other studies have found that women use violence in relationships as often or more frequently than men do.

* Alimony isn’t enough for some spouses. Here a man says his mother's greed drove their plot to end a marriage and gain a fortune.

* Absurdistan in America by Stephen Baskerville. He has many thought provoking articles on alimony, child-support and government intervention in the family.

LEGAL INFORMATION AND RESEARCH CORNER:
* Here’s a great inexpensive “Legal Research” reference book that will take the mystique out of the terms used in case law, legal pleadings, motions, etc. It tells you what they all mean and how to find what you need. It helped me immensely. If you are going to be Pro Se, this is one of the books you definitely must have.

* The constitutions, statutes, judicial opinions, and regulations for the fifty states, plus D.C., and the U.S. territories and affiliated jurisdictions.

JOIN THE ALIMONY FORUM:
You are invited to join the Alimony forum, courtesy of Yahoo Groups. Keep up-to-date on the latest Alimony news and happenings. Tell your story or pose your alimony-related suggestions and questions here. Go here to sign up.

We welcome suggestions of content to add to our blog either in the form of links, articles, etc. Send them to us at the contact link on our blog menu.

Marriage Strike? Women Rule?

One of the goals of this blog is to show you that you don’t have to be at the mercy of the family law system. A lot of you out there are hard pressed to afford the legal fees to defend yourself. This a position in which I found myself.

I am retired, living on a small Social Security check, have no assets and can’t afford someone to represent me. I was unable to pay the lifetime alimony with which I was saddled. They wanted to hold me in contempt and throw me in jail, I then made a resolve to not let that happen. To date, I have been successful.

Even if you have an attorney representing you, knowing what is happening in the area of alimony is worthwhile. At least you will be able to keep abreast of what is going on that will affect you. You never know when your financial situation will change and put you at risk.

New Revision Available
The Second Edition of the Fight Back!! ebook report is now available on the website for downloading. Many new articles and links have been added to help you with your Pro Se efforts in court.

Appeal Brief Filed
The initial amended brief was filed on October 17th in the Florida 4th District Court of Appeals on the request for a Declaratory Judgment (DJ) on the constitutionality of the Florida Statutes that govern dissolutions and alimony. Along with this has been filed a “Suggestion for Certification to the Supreme Court” of a matter of great public interest in regards to the DJ.

The Alimony Tide May Be Turning!!
Read this recent decision by the Florida 4th District Court of Appeals with Chief Judge J.C. Farmer concurring. This ruling will have far reaching effects.

Siplin Bill On Co-Habitation Passes
Co-habitation is a grounds for termination of alimony. However, the burden of proof is on the spouse requesting relief. See the text of the bill.

Marriage Strike
While the government is supposedly trying to encourage marriage by spending millions of taxpayer dollars to promote it, in reality, their tyrannical and gender biased court procedures are in fact preventing it and supporting the reasons to not get married or re-married again. Facing a better than 50% chance of getting a
divorce, men have declared a “marriage strike!”

Check these sites:
Renew America
Mens News Daily
The National Marriage Project
I-Feminists.com
Matt Weeks. com

WOMEN RULE!
Here are some interesting articles to show how women are surpassing men and are more than equal in our society. Also, make note of the phrase “Women Rule.” There appears to be some sort of movement going on using that phrase. It's worth keeping an eye on this.
Read these articles:
Fortune Magazine
Business Week
St. Pete Times – Women in college
St. Pete Times – Women in government
Maynard Institute for Journalism Education
The Seattle Times

Google the phrase and you will come up with a lot more.

Interesting Reading
* Contempt of court - Arbitrary excess of power
* The Case Against Alimony
* Here's a case of college student David Zamos, taking on Microsoft’s battery of lawyers, and winning after some 37 rounds of motions and pleadings over the last 6 months. It shows you can win even if you are the underdog and are willing to fight back. I feel the same applies to family court. Educate yourself and challenge the system.

LEGAL INFORMATION AND RESEARCH CORNER
* Doing research and don't know where to look. Try this site:
* Legal Information Institute Great site for legal research
* Contempt of Court: A background study
* Levels of Scrutiny Under the Equal Protection Clause
* State Immunity - Suing the State (and Other Government Entities)
in the Twenty-First Century.

ABOLISH ALIMONY T-SHIRTS
Tell others about your protest and help to spread the word that there is hope. Go here and get one.

Welcome!

Welcome to Abolish-Alimony.org.

Let it be stated at the outset that our goal is to abolish the present alimony (a/k/a spousal support) system with all it's inequities so that it can be replaced with a system that represents the present day reality. Divorce and family law is based on an antiquated social custom that it is a man's responsibility to support women because they are weaker, incapable of being equal to men, and better equipped to raise children. This is simply not the case in today's society and our laws need to be changed to reflect this fact.

We are making progress to challenge the constitutionality of the Florida Statutes. This blog will document our progress.

For an update of where we stand, you can go to:
http://www.abolish-alimony.org/alimony-legal-filings.htm

We are in the process of filing our Appellant Initial Brief with the 4th DCA. They will be listed under this heading:
Florida 4th District Court of Appeals
Case # 4D05-3906