by Jorge Gomez • 2 minutes
First Liberty received a big outpouring of support in our parental-rights case that’s pending at the U.S. Supreme Court.
The case involves our client Blake Warner, a Florida father who was told by a court that he must have an attorney in order to legally represent his child. Alongside volunteer attorneys at the law firm Baker Botts, we asked the Supreme Court to hear the case and review a lower court decision. We argue that forcing Blake to get a lawyer infringes on multiple fundamental rights: a parent’s right to make critical decisions for his child, and a child’s rights to access the courts and do so without an attorney.
This is a major case that impacts parents’ constitutional right to raise their children as they see fit. And as the Supreme Court considers whether to hear it, Americans are coming together to support our client.
We’re happy to announce that a diverse coalition filed eight friend-of-the-court briefs supporting Blake’s case. This includes:
At a time when parents are being targeted for exercising their constitutional rights and raising their children consistent with their faith, parents are often left with no choice but to go to court to seek relief.
“Preventing parents from representing their children is a denial of their fundamental parental rights guaranteed by the Constitution,” said First Liberty’s Executive General Counsel Hiram Sasser. “Parents know what is best for their children and should be able to represent them in court.”
Legal precedent has long protected parents’ right to speak on their children’s behalf in court. But according to the federal appeals court, parents’ right to speak for their children in court depends on their ability to hire an attorney—whether a parent can pay or find an attorney willing to take the case for free. This undermines parents’ ability to protect their children’s best interests.
The power to decide whether a lawyer will represent you, or whether you’ll represent yourself, is a choice that is no different from the many other decisions parents make on behalf of their children. When a court forces someone to get an attorney, it disregards the strong constitutional presumption that a parent knows best. The choice to proceed pro se (without a lawyer) is a constitutionally protected exercise of parental discretion.
As part of our mission to protect religious freedom, First Liberty supports the right of parents to make decisions about what’s best for their children and to raise them consistent with their religious beliefs. The First Amendment undeniably protects that right. Parents should have the power to decide whether a lawyer will represent their child, or whether they will take on that responsibility. Protecting parental rights is central to protecting religious liberty.
Please continue to pray for the Supreme Court justices as they deliberate. This case has implications for every family in the country. Our children are not children of the State. The nation’s highest court has a tremendous opportunity to ensure the relationship between parents and children receives the legal protection it deserves.
 |
|
|
