Attorneys suing over WV's troubled foster care system seek to review lawsuit, request new judge
A group representing children suing the state of West Virginia over its troubled foster care system wants the lawsuit revived after a judge tossed the case in February.
A Better Childhood, a nonprofit legal advocacy group based in New York, is also seeking a new judge to preside over the class-action lawsuit, according to a filing on Tuesday.
'We're asking to get the decision reversed, and we're asking to get the judge off the case,' said Marcia Lowry, the organization's executive director. 'We continue to think this is a very serious and unconstitutional situation.'
The 2019 lawsuit brought by foster children sought to address pervasive issues in West Virginia's overburdened child welfare system, including a shortage of Child Protective Services workers and safe homes for children. Kids were left to linger in the system for years with no plans for permanent homes or ending up in abusive group homes, the lawsuit said.
In his dismissal of the case, U.S. District Judge Joseph R. Goodwin didn't deny problems still persist, but said the situation couldn't be fixed through the courts. 'This court cannot take over the foster care system of West Virginia,' Goodwin wrote in an opinion dismissing the case, adding that it was an 'unsatisfying result' to years of litigation.
'I know that there are children who deeply suffer in the custody of the state,' he continued. 'West Virginia's foster care system has cycled through inaction, bureaucratic indifference, shocking neglect and temporary fixes for years. The blame squarely lies with West Virginia state government.'
Lowry said that Goodwin failed to rule on underlying issues in the system and has 'firmly-held beliefs against institutional reform litigation.'
'The first thing he's supposed to do is decide liability. This judge has made it clear that he does not think that, regardless that there are serious problems in the system, he still can get relief. In our view, that is wrong,' she said. 'In the interest of justice and fairness, we think the case should go to a judge that doesn't have such firmly-held beliefs.'
Additionally, Lowry believes the suit should continue, saying a court ruling in the case is likely to address children's needs. The lawsuit asks the courts to mandate that the Department of Human Services place children in safe homes or facilities, receive necessary services and more. They're also asking for an outside monitor to 'conduct record reviews as necessary to ensure compliance.'
'No doubt, institutional reform of a state agency is a daunting and arduous task,' the filing reads. 'Federal courts have a constitutional duty to confront that task, not to shy away from it.'
Shafer and Shafer, a West Virginia-based law firm, and Disability Rights West Virginia are also plaintiffs in the case.
DoHS did not immediately return a request for comment. Prior to Godowin's dismissal order, the agency sought to have the case thrown out, citing improvements to the system that included hiring more CPS workers.
The lawsuit was previously thrown out in 2021 then revived by an appeals court in 2022.
In 2023, U.S. District Judge Thomas E. Johnston recused himself from the case after Mountain State Spotlight, a nonprofit newsroom, pointed out ethical concerns regarding Johnston's communication with lawmakers and the former Department of Health and Human Resources about legislation impacting foster care and possibly the lawsuit.
Public information available through the State Auditor's website shows that DoHS has paid more than $8 million to Brown and Peisch, a law firm in Washington, D.C. that has provided the state's legal counsel in the case since 2020.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
22 minutes ago
- USA Today
Trump offers Putin, Zelensky contrasting approaches
President Donald Trump has offered his critics, the world and U.S. allies contrasting images on how America treats its friends and adversaries after failing to broker a ceasefire in Russia's unprovoked war to annex Ukraine. At the Alaska-based summit Russian President Vladimir Putin received a red-carpet welcome from the U.S. that included a B-2 bomber fly-by and a ride in the presidential limousine, nicknamed "The Beast" with video of him laughing with Trump. The two superpower leaders exchanged flatteries, with Putin saying the war wouldn't have started it Trump had been president in 2022. Andrei Gurulyov, a Russian parliament member and retired general, described it as a "breakthrough" moment that was played up heavily on Russian state television. Putin's foreign ministry said it marked an end to the foreign country's reported isolation. That showcase is in sharp contrast to a fiery exchange Trump and top administration officials had earlier this year with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy when the foreign ally's leader was told in the Oval Office he was being disrespectful to the U.S. and risking World War III. Zelenskyy was teased by Trump and others for his attire and eventually booted from the White House. Republican lawmakers, such as Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., suggested Ukraine's president should either resign, change his tune or "send somebody over that we can do business with." The administration went as far to pause intelligence sharing and weapons shipments to Ukraine after the incident, and while Trump has threatened to impose sharp economic penalties on Russian if an agreement to end the war wasn't reached, he suspended those sanctions after the Alaska sit-down with Putin. Now, Trump is poised to welcome Zelenskyy back to Washington on August 18 to discuss a peace agreement. Republican praise Trump's strength, Dems fret 'it was just theater' After being hyped by the administration and its congressional allies as an opportunity to end the more than three-year conflict in region, Trump's dealmaking skills are being tested in an international negotiation that could backfire on the country and globe. "The goal is always peace," the White House said in an Aug. 15 post on X, amid the talks. Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Arkansas, said in an Aug. 16 post on X that Trump "stood firm in defense of U.S. interests," and that the summit marks a critical first step to a "durable and stable peace that protects Ukraine's territorial and economic sovereignty." But Democrats and other detractors warn that the summit has largely benefited Putin, who is facing war crime charges from the International Criminal Court and seeking legitimacy on the global stage after starting a war that has resulted in more than 1.4 million casualties, according to studies. "Our fear is that the Trump-Putin meeting wasn't diplomacy—it was just theater," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, said in a post on X ahead of the talks. Trump seeks reset in pursuit of peace as Europe worries Trump returned to Washington on Aug. 16 carrying plenty of compliments from Putin, who said the war wouldn't have started if Joe Biden hadn't been in charge back in 2022. But without a deal the administration appears to be skipping cease-fire discussions altogether and pivoting quickly to reset its public relationship with Zelenskyy, who will be returning to the Oval Office on Aug. 18 for a talk that remains inconclusive to most observers. Trump began to tip-toe away from Putin and toward Zelenskyy in late April after Russia bombarded Kyiv with missiles. The president, however, is also reportedly considering land swaps including Ukraine areas not currently occupied by the Russians, according to the New York Times, something U.S. allies have opposed in the past. Zelenskyy said in an Aug. 16 post on X that he spoke with Trump and European leaders, adding that the "killings must stop" but that the battling must pause first before a larger peace agreement can be made. "The positions are clear," he said. "A real peace must be achieved, one that will be lasting, not just another pause between Russian invasions." In a joint statement, European leaders echoed that sentiment and expressed support for a Putin-Zelenskyy summit. "I'm disgusted that Donald Trump met with Putin on American soil and did so with no representatives from Ukraine," Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Illinois, a retired Army helicopter pilot, said in an Aug. 16 post on X. "Trump and his inflated ego may not realize it, but it's clear that Putin is not engaging in good faith to end this war."
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
State sends National Guard members to Washington at Trump team's request
West Virginia is sending 300 to 400 members of its National Guard to the US capital to assist in the Trump administration's takeover of the city's police department. The move by a nearby state comes as hundreds of District of Columbia National Guard were activated this week to back up local law enforcement in what the Republican administration calls an effort to crack down on crime and homelessness in the District of Columbia. Governor Patrick Morrisey said in a post on Saturday on X that he was deploying '300-400 skilled personnel' from the West Virginia National Guard to support Mr Trump's 'initiative to make DC safe and beautiful'. Mr Morrissey said the step reflects 'our commitment to a strong and secure America'.
New York Times
an hour ago
- New York Times
West Virginia to Send Hundreds of State National Guard Troops to D.C.
The National Guard's presence in Washington will grow in the coming days after the governor of West Virginia announced on Saturday that he was sending hundreds of the state's National Guard members at President Trump's request. Gov. Patrick Morrisey said the state would send 300 to 400 troops to Washington to support Mr. Trump's 'initiative to restore cleanliness and safety to Washington, D.C.' A White House official confirmed that additional National Guard troops were being called in to Washington, reiterating that their role is to protect federal assets and provide a visible presence. The 800 already deployed troops all come from the D.C. National Guard, which the president can call out directly. Governors typically control the National Guard in their states, though Mr. Trump circumvented this when he deployed troops to Los Angeles this summer, a matter currently under litigation in federal court. It is little surprise that the first state to announce it was sending troops to Washington is governed by a Trump-supporting Republican like Mr. Morrisey. It was unclear whether other states were sending National Guard troops to the city as well. National Guard troops have been called out on the streets of Washington before, including in a deployment five years ago during the protests after the killing of George Floyd. But this stationing of military personnel in the city during otherwise ordinary times has drawn significant criticism — possibly more so than some of the administration's other actions this week, such as the president's unprecedented step of directing the actions of the Metropolitan Police Department. The National Guard troops have largely been stationed in high-profile places like the National Mall or landmarks like Union Station, where Humvees are conspicuously parked. Elsewhere in the city, scores of officers from federal agencies like the F.B.I. and the Homeland Security Department have joined the local police on active law enforcement operations this week. Kingsley Wilson, the Defense Department's press secretary, told reporters this week that the troops were not intended to perform law enforcement tasks, though some members of the Guard briefly detained a man on Friday who was later arrested on the charge of assaulting a U.S. Park Police officer on the National Mall.
