Realitycheck:
Do you understand the concept of an analogy? There were multiple households on the ranch - the Texas courts said so, and so does simple common sense.

yes - I understand an analogy. do you understand that the court never said the ranch was more than one household? and that the warrants should stand?

the Texas courts never said the ranch was multiple households. The court said that CPS hadn't proved that the younger childen were in immediate danger. That's why the children were sent back.

of course, we all know they are in danger every second they are in these "parents" hands, but that's another issue. (I use "parents" very loosely here since obviously they are really bad parents. If you have to hide and isolate your children to get them to grow up as decent adults, you must be a pathetic parent.)

realitycheck, last I checked the First Amendment stated that "Congress shall make NO LAWS respecting an ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION or PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
HOW ABOUT A REALITYCHECK!!!!!!

realitycheck: "do you understand that the court never said the ranch was more than one household? and that the warrants should stand?"

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

The courts haven't ruled on that yet. But Judge Walther has already indicated that the ranch was more than one household when she ruled that Barbara Jessop didn't have standing to challenge material taken from other areas of the ranch. So if there are multiple households, the warrant is invalid. And that's not even considering the other problems, such as that the Texas Rangers either knew who "Sarah" really was, or should have known. Either way, the warrant is no good.

Barbara will of course rule that the warrant is valid, but she will be overruled on appeal.