ALFRA State Meeting in Birmingham Sept. 12, 2010

Special Guest Speaker will be Stanley Charles Thorne, a nationally known constitutional law attorney. 

See Thorne's website at www.afjp.org.

The state meeting will be held at

Hampton Inn
3930 Grant's Mill Road
Birmingham, AL 35210

Time: TBA this weekend.

###

12 Rules that women should follow according to Sue Bell Cobb, Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court

31 August 2010 - Decatur, Alabama - Sue Bell Cobb spoke at a women's luncheon where she gave her insight on rules women should follow in a male dominated world.

The 12 rules are as follows.

1.  Don't try to “bust up” the old boy network. The goal should be to navigate it, not to destroy it.

2.   Seek out men with daughters because they understand female ambition.

3.   Cross gender lines. To truly succeed, you need to develop relationships with both men and women.

4.   To succeed, women need to “be someone people like.” That means being an encourager, not a whiner.  People will never help people they don’t like.

5    Widen your comfort zone. If you’re easily offended, get over it.

6.  Take risks. Nothing ventured, nothing gained. Do not be so afraid of losing.

7.   Take a stand. Let people know where you stand.

8 .  Persistence, she said, is essential. Another way of defining that is, ‘No means maybe.  How do you win a white-water rafting race? You stay in the raft. That, she said, is persistence.

9.   Follow through. Women are better at this than men. The rooster crows, but the hen delivers. Women know how to get things done.

10.  Women need to know the difference between friends and allies. Friends are there at high times and lows.  Allies are useful on a particular issue, but they may be gone the next time you need them.

11.  Dance with those who help you. Loyalty doesn’t just come up, it goes down. The people that are working with you — what are you doing to show your appreciation to them? They say, ‘Be careful of the people you step on on the way up, because you may see them on the way back down.’ Be loyal to them always. Don’t just use people and throw them away.

12.  Never ever, ever forget that you’re a woman.

###

What are Associational Rights?

29 August 10 - Have you heard of associational rights? Many have not.  Allow us to explain.  When you spend time with friends and family that time spent together  laughing, talking, eating, etc.  these activities are associational rights.

Associational rights hold true when you tuck your child into bed, read him/her a book, watch T.V., and/or just being together.

When a court denies time with a parent and child and does so without any written findings of parental unfitness, the parent and child are being denied associational rights, which are protected by the Constitution of the United States as being fundamental liberty interest rights. 

The privacy of association rights are embedded in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Associational rights have been ruled upon only a couple times by the Supreme Court of the United States and one of those cases happened to be in Alabama.

An ALFRA poll of Alabama Attorneys tells us they know nothing about associational rights. 

If associational rights were argued at time of divorce each parent and the children would have more balanced time together.  But realize it may take the U.S. Supreme Court  for Alabama courts honor the Constitution. Why? Well, read below and you will understand what we are saying.

To protect your constitutional rights in a child custody case have your attorney study and argue associational rights.  Additionally, they must read the entire U.S. Supreme Court opinion of Troxel v. Granville, (2000)  including the dissenting opinions.

Read more below.

Associational Rights

While the United States Constitution's First Amendment identifies the rights to assemble and to petition the government, the text of the First Amendment does not make specific mention of a right to association. Nevertheless, the United States Supreme Court held in NAACP v. Alabama that the freedom of association is an essential part of the Freedom of Speech because, in many cases, people can engage in effective speech only when they join with others. The Supreme Court has found the Constitution to protect the freedom of association in two cases (NAACP v. Alabama, (1958); and Roberts v. United States Jaycees, (1984).

1. Intimate Associations. A fundamental element of personal liberty is the right to choose to enter into and maintain certain intimate human relationships. These intimate human relationships are known as "intimate associations." The paradigmatic "intimate association" is the family.

2. Expressive Associations. Expressive associations are groups that engage in activities protected by the First Amendment-speech, assembly, petitioning government for a redress of grievances, and the free exercise of religion.

Associational Rights were first attached to the First Amendment of the Constitution by the U.S. Supreme Court in NAACP vs. State of Alabama U.S. (1958). The State of Alabama attempted to shut down the NAACP and the state of Alabama demanded a member list, which the NAACP refused. 

This case was sent to the U.S. Supreme Court three (3) times because Alabama Courts would not follow or honor Federal law or obey remand orders from the U.S. Supreme Court. 

In NAACPthe U.S. Supreme Court said,

"It is beyond debate that freedom to engage in association for the advancement of beliefs and ideas is an inseparable aspect of the 'liberty' assured by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which embraces freedom of speech."

"This Court has repeatedly held that a governmental purpose to control or prevent activities constitutionally subject to state regulation may not be achieved by means which sweep unnecessarily broadly, and thereby invade the area of protected freedoms." The power to regulate must be so exercised as not, in attaining a permissible end, unduly to infringe the protected freedom."

". . . Even though the governmental purpose be legitimate and substantial, that purpose cannot be pursued by means that broadly stifle fundamental personal liberties when the end can be more narrowly achieved."

The U.S Supreme Court in NAACPalso said, 

"Novelty in procedural requirements cannot be permitted to thwart review in this Court applied for by those who, in justified reliance upon prior decisions, seek vindication in state courts of their federal constitutional rights."

Again, in a second Associational Rights case, the U.S. Supreme Court in Roberts v. United States Jaycees, (1984) said,

"The void-for-vagueness doctrine reflects the principle that "a statute which either forbids or requires the doing of an act in terms so vague that [persons] of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its application violates the first essential of due process of law....

...The requirement that government articulate its aims with a reasonable degree of clarity ensures that state power will be exercised only on behalf of policies reflecting an authoritative choice among competing social values, reduces the danger of caprice and discrimination in the administration of the laws, enables individuals to conform their conduct to the requirements of law, and permits meaningful judicial review.

####

Has Alabama DHR negatively affected your life as it relates to Child Support?

22 August 2010 - If Alabama DHR has negatively affected your life WITHOUT providing proper Due Process including sending untimely notices or preventing a right to be heard, email us your story.  ALFRA is working on a report about DHR, child support and the denial of due process. 

Your name or email will NOT be used or given to anyone for any purpose.   In other words, your personal information will be kept private. 

Your comments may be included in our official report to which ALFRA will provide to federal and state officials. 

The Subject line of the email should be: DHR/Child Support.

###