Texas appeals to state Supreme Court in FLDS case

The department justifies the removal of babies from the ranch, citing a Child Protective Services supervisor's statement that "the little boys, the babies, the girls, what I have found is that they are living under an umbrella of belief that having children at a young age is a blessing and therefore any child in that environment would not be safe."

In a separate filing asking for emergency relief, CPS said if the appellate decision were allowed to stand "the department will be compelled to return approximately 124 children from YFZ Ranch to approximately 34 alleged mothers."

The department went on to say it was important to establish family relationships in order to determine potential risks of sexual abuse. Allowing the children to return to the ranch would impede that investigation. "In addition, the children have a constitutional best interest right to know with absolute certainty who their parents are. Due to the orchestrated conspiracy of silence, neither the department nor the trial court was able to match alleged parents with the children."

The ruling the agency argued would force the return of these children to an environment in which adversarial hearings clearly established that there is a practice of forcing under-aged girls into marriages with older men. Such practice, the agency argued, is "an institutional practice, a practice that was supported by the alleged mothers. This would subject the children to continuing sexual and emotional abuse."

The state agency also argued that the Court of Appeals ignored long-standing precedents from previous court rulings. In order to show that the trial court abused its discretion, the appeals court judges would have to have found that Judge Barbara Walther's decision to place the children in state custody was "so arbitrary and unreasonable" that she committed a prejudicial error of law.

Thursday's decision from the Texas 3rd Court of Appeals "offers a poor analysis of misstated facts," and overstepped its authority in ordering that the children be returned, DFPS attorneys said.

The department said it would not be safe for any child to return to the ranch "because the adults on the ranch expressed that they 'aren't doing anything harmful to their children.'"

Meanwhile, CPS lawyers were back in court in San Angelo this afternoon for a hearing involving Louisa Jessop, who gave birth two weeks ago to a son while in state protective custody. Judge Barbara Walther must determine what will happen to the child. That decision has been made more complicated by Thursday's appeals court decision.

---

E-mail: bwinslow@desnews.com