Supreme Court of Texas Issues Unanimous Ruling in Favor of Houston Mother in Landmark Parental Rights Case
The ruling reverses a judgment handed down by a Harris County district court judge in 2020 that granted a lifetime protective order against Christine Stary on behalf of her three minor children. The order came about five months after Ms. Stary was accused of injuring her youngest child in an incident at her home, but criminal charges stemming from the incident were dismissed.
Holly Draper, CEO and managing partner of The Draper Law Firm, represented Ms. Stary before the state's highest court in tandem with former Texas Supreme Court Justice Eva Guzman, on behalf of the Family Freedom Project, which works on legislation and cases that impact the right of families to raise their children.
Ms. Draper argued that the order granted against Ms. Stary violated her client's constitutional rights because it prohibited her from having any contact with her children forever without meeting the required level of evidence. Ms. Stary also was barred from raising evidence of domestic violence committed by her ex-husband.
The Supreme Court's opinion delivered by Justice Jane Bland says in part, "We hold that constitutional due process requires clear and convincing evidence to support a protective order prohibiting contact between a parent and her children under the statute authorizing protective orders of longer than two years."
Ms. Draper said, 'My client lost almost five years of time with her children due to this unconstitutional protective order, and she can never get that back. She is thrilled with the court's ruling and looks forward to the opportunity to build back a relationship with her children. With this ruling, no parent will have their rights terminated without the constitutionally protected standard of clear and convincing evidence.'
You can read the Supreme Court of Texas opinion on this case here.
About The Draper Law Firm
The Draper Law Firm is a family law boutique in North Texas. Its attorneys handle family law cases in all DFW counties and represent family law clients in appeals statewide. The firm previously prevailed in the Supreme Court of Texas in one of the biggest parental rights cases in Texas history, In re C.J.C. To learn more, visit draperfirm.com.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
13 hours ago
- The Hill
Epstein survivor: Maxwell pardon would be ‘huge error'
Jeffrey Epstein survivor Haley Robson said that President Trump would make a 'huge error' if he were to pardon Epstein's close confidant, convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell. 'I don't think Ghislaine has anything to say. I think it's all rubbish. I think it's dishonesty. It's a huge mistake for her to have the move in the first place, if you pardon her, they'll be making a huge error,' Robson said in an interview with CNN released on Tuesday. Earlier this month, Trump said in an interview with Newsmax that he had not been asked about a pardon for Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year prison sentence on sex trafficking charges. When asked about granting clemency for Maxwell, the British socialite and Epstein's longtime associate, in exchange for her testimony, the president said 'I'm allowed to do it. But nobody's asked me to do it.' Robson, who was introduced to Epstein by a classmate, said she met the convicted sex offender and the late, disgraced financier in 2002 as a 16-year-old in West Palm Beach, Fla. Robson was asked to give Epstein a massage, and he then started masturbating in front of her. She rejected his advances, but the disgraced financier then offered her $200 for each girl she recruited. 'I think at the moment, it was an act of me trying to just survive and get out of the situation, because I didn't know what to expect next. I didn't know what was going to happen,' Robson told CNN, adding that she recruited girls for two years. Last month, Maxwell was quietly transferred from a federal prison in Florida to a prison camp in Texas. The transfer came as her legal team appeals her case to the Supreme Court. Maxwell sat for two interviews with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche in Tallahassee in July, as the Trump administration faced increased pressure to release more documents related to Epstein's case. Maxwell's lawyer previously said he had not spoken to the president about a potential pardon. Maxwell's move to Federal Prison Camp Bryan spurred an investigation from House Judiciary Democrats, who argue the transfer creates 'the strong appearance that it is attempting to cover up the full extent of the relationship between Trump and Epstein, who died by suicide in 2019 in New York as he awaited trial.
Yahoo
15 hours ago
- Yahoo
Justices asked to prevent ‘immigration dragnet' ensnaring citizens in roving Trump patrols
The Trump administration recently told the Supreme Court that a California judge's order put law enforcement in a 'straitjacket.' But plaintiffs who won that lower court order have urged the high court to keep it in place, arguing that lifting it would bless an 'immigration dragnet' ensnaring millions of people in the Los Angeles area — including U.S. citizens — based on how they look and speak, and where they work and congregate. U.S. District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong issued the temporary restraining order against the government on July 11. The Biden appointee said the individuals and groups that sued, which include U.S. citizens, would likely succeed in proving that the government is 'conducting roving patrols without reasonable suspicion and denying access to lawyers.' For now, she said, the government can't rely solely on any combination of the following four factors to make stops: apparent race or ethnicity; speaking Spanish or accented English; presence at a particular location, like a day laborer pickup area; or one's type of work. After a federal appeals court panel declined to intervene on the administration's behalf, U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer turned to the Supreme Court for help in lifting the order, which he said 'defies blackletter Fourth Amendment law, imposing a straitjacket on law-enforcement efforts that is inimical to the context- and case-specific totality-of-the-circumstances inquiry that this Court's precedents demand.' Opposing emergency high court relief, the plaintiffs countered that the judge's order 'broke no new legal ground,' and that it 'does not prevent the government from enforcing the immigration laws, conducting consensual encounters, or relying on any or all of the four factors along with other facts to form reasonable suspicion.' They further wrote that the administration's 'extraordinary claim that it can get very close to justifying a seizure of any Latino person in the Central District [of California] because of the asserted number of Latino people there who are not legally present is anathema to the Constitution.' The administration can file a final reply brief the justices, after which we will learn whether this will be the latest instance of the high court saving the administration from a lower court loss in President Donald Trump's second term. Subscribe to the Deadline: Legal Newsletter for expert analysis on the top legal stories of the week, including updates from the Supreme Court and developments in the Trump administration's legal cases. This article was originally published on
USA Today
a day ago
- USA Today
Texas AG asks judge to arrest Beto O'Rourke for redistricting battle fundraising
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is asking a judge to jail Beto O'Rourke, claiming the former Democratic congressman violated a court order by fundraising to support the dozens of state Democratic lawmakers who have fled the state amid its redistricting battle. The attorney general's request builds on a previous order, granted by a Texas county judge earlier this month, barring O'Rourke and his nonprofit, Powered by People, from raising money to help fund the Democratic lawmakers' exodus from the state more than a week ago. Paxton claimed in his filing to the Tarrant County court on Aug. 12 that O'Rourke violated the fundraising block by soliciting donations through the Democrats' ActBlue platform. "He's about to find out that running your mouth and ignoring the rule of law has consequences in Texas," Paxton said in a statement released alongside the filing. "It's time to lock him up." Paxton's move is the latest in growing escalations between Democrats and Republicans in the Lone Star state, as the standoff over GOP attempts to redraw congressional boundaries in Texas. The redistricting attempt could add another five Republican seats to Congress ahead of the 2026 midterm elections, and is seen as blatant gerrymandering efforts by Democrats. In response, Democrats decamped the state en masse, many taking refuge in blue-led states like Illinois and New York, to prevent the vote from taking place in Austin, Texas, where the Republicans' firm majority would all but guarantee the revised maps pass. Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott ordered the arrest of the dozens of Democratic lawmakers who have fled while Paxton asked the state Supreme Court to oust them from office over their absence, arguing they abandoned their seats. Texas redistricting: Which states have threatened to redraw their own maps in response to Texas GOP plans? In the first sentence of the court filing, Paxton quoted the former congressman at an Aug. 9 Fort Worth event saying: "There are no refs in this game, f--- the rules," claiming O'Rourke was "disparaging' the previous court order. In response, O'Rourke posted the full clip of his speech at the event to X, saying that Paxton took his words out of context in the filing. In the full recorded video of the speech, O'Rourke is speaking about the Democrats' attempts to put forward their own revised maps in states like California, New Jersey, Maryland, and Illinois, telling the crowd that blue states should redistrict now and "not wait for Texas to move first." "You may say to yourself, 'Well, those aren't the rules,'" O'Rourke says immediately after speaking about the Democrats' redistricting efforts. "There are no refs in this game, f--- the rules, we are going to win. Whatever it takes, we are going to take this to them in every way that we can." O'Rourke said in his post on X on Aug. 12 that the attorney general's office lied in its filing. "We're seeking maximum sanctions in response to his abuse of office," he said. "Taking the fight directly to this corrupt, lying thug." Along with jail time, the attorney general is also requesting O'Rourke be held in contempt and fined $500. Kathryn Palmer is a national trending news reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach her at kapalmer@ and on X @KathrynPlmr.
