Marci Hamilton on FLDS: The best the Cardozo School has to offer?

Time for a look-back — all the way back to what seems ages ago, April 8 — at one example of the loose logic and uninformed, irresponsible commentary that filled the blogosphere in early April, in the week following Texas CPS’ now infamous FLDS raid. Our subject du Jour is Marci Hamilton (pictured right), an “internationally recognized expert on constitutional and copyright law”and endowed professor at the Cardozo School of Law. I first read Marci’s inflammatory piece, Prosecuting Polygamy in El Dorado, on the Huffington Post. It is worth noting that the illogic that permeates Marci’s writing continues to raise its ugly head in such popular climes as the O’Reilly Factor. Marci herself continues unrepentant.

On the basis of the very flimsiest sort of “evidence” then available, Marci — like many others at the time — showcased gullibility or bigotry in condemning people about whom she personally knew nothing and against whom Texas CPS had offered no real evidence of misconduct. This star of the Cardozo School of Law relied on CPS propaganda and assumed it was all true about everyone living at the FLDS ranch in Eldorado, Texas. I suppose we should be grateful that blogomobocracy, without more, leaves no physical scars. But blogmobocrats can incite others to physical violence and intimidation just as occurred in this case.

As an opener, watch the following clip from Monty Python’s Holy Grail. As you watch, substitute the word “child abuser” in place of “witch” and “Professor Hamilton” in place of “King Arthur”. “Sir Bedevere” is “Judge Walther.” You’ll get a good feel for the quality of Professor Hamilton’s thought process on the FLDS. Perhaps, after reading this piece, you’ll be ready to join her round table.

Marci herself may be scarred for life by the intellectual jarring suffered through her tall leaps of logic over gaping factual fault lines. It is worth asking to what extent Marci’s exposure to anti-LDS propaganda at Princeton Theological Seminary (no paragon of civil rights or tolerance), the Center of Theological Inquiry, and Emory University School of Law — all protestant-affiliated entities — have biased her thinking against the FLDS. She may be a victim of authoritarian brainwashing. Where was Texas CPS when Marci needed them?

I am not FLDS and have no intentions of joining up. However, the members of the FLDS faith are citizens of the Unites States of America entitled to the constitutional protections that prohibit search and seizure without probable cause and enshrine freedom of thought, speech, religion and association.

Governments cannot be permitted to behave as the government of Texas has in the YFZ case. As one Texas mental health worker wrote,

On the awful day that they separated the mothers and children the level of cruelty and lack of respect for human rights was overwhelming. Crying, begging children were ripped away from their devastated mothers and the mothers were put on buses to either return to the ranch or to go to shelters. Most went to shelters because they were told they would be able to see their children if they did not return to the ranch. This, of course, was another lie. … The floor was literally slick with tears in places.

Yet in the face of such real evidence, smiley-faced Professor Marci has the audacity, today, to write a piece saying that Texas 3rd Court of Appeals was wrong to order these families reunited. This is a story of a local government driven to violate its own constitution by the religious bigotry of a local, vocal majority of its citizens. Like the witch burners in old Massachusetts and elsewhere, they saw evil where there was little or none and lashed out in their ignorance, twisting the law beyond recognition. In the process they have destroyed innocent families and wrought incalculable harm on the Constitution.

Now back to Professor Marci. Her stuff is indented below. Mine is not.

There is nothing so dangerous for a child as an insular, patriarchical [sic] religious organization, and the Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints, whose compound in El Dorado, Texas, is now under control of the Texas authorities, is one of the scariest examples.

Nothing so dangerous? Really? What about an intrusive mob of protestant bigots driven by secular hatred of what they do not understand? What about Texas CPS thugs who abuse and threaten little kids with never again seeing their parents if they don’t falsely incriminate them? What about a small-time Texas sheriff who totes a brass-tabbed Holy Bible in his official SUV? What about exploitative “foster care” parents and their disturbed charges who sexually abuse foster kids? What is worse: an “insular, patriarchal religious organization” or an insular, hierarchical government agency that refuses to admit when it’s made a dreadful mistake?

It took the extraordinary bravery of a 16-year-old girl to set in motion a chain of events that should have happened long ago.

What 16-year-old girl? “Extraordinary bravery”? How about extraordinarily irresponsibility on the part of Marci Hamilton who, as a highly trained law professor and “expert” in constitutional law should know better? Ms. Hamilton, you had no good reason to assume that Texas CPS did then or ever would tell the truth about anything related to this case. Texas CPS has now admitted that the 16-year-old doesn’t exist. She has been entirely dropped from the case. A responsible commentator on the law would have seen through this all-to-familiar government ruse to get a search warrant on false pretenses.

She reported that she had been “married” to a 50-year-old man, forced to have sex, get pregnant, and have a baby. Because of her, Texas authorities have taken hundreds of children and women to safety. From all reports, they have yet to find her.

Reportedly. Reportedly. Reportedly. The “girl” was later found to be a middle-aged, out-of-state habitual liar with a penchant for calling in false reports of abuse. One Texas judge had refused to issue a search warrant on the basis of her phone call before CPS dredged up Judge Walther. The man accused in the phone call was finally located outside of Texas and had not ever visited the FLDS ranch where the hoax caller said the abuse occurred. On what grounds did Hamilton so easily jump congratulate a girl who did not exist on her “extraordinary bravery” in accusing a man who had never seen her? Cupidity? Stupidity? Religious bigotry? Professor Hamilton, despite her high-sounding resume, is part of the vicious mob that has destroyed the lives of hundreds of innocent men, women and children.

I give the Texas law enforcement and child protective agency officials a great deal of credit for moving in on the compound. They bucked the three trends in our culture that have kept these children at risk for far too long.

I’m sure Marci did then. Apparently, judging from her most recent writings on the subject, she still does. The question is, why? What are her real motives for defending this kind of government-sponsored brutality? I think she continues to defend it primarily because having taken such a high-profile position on the issue early on, she values her ego and reputation over the welfare of children and families.

First, authorities in general are too fearful of intervening in religious enclaves, even when the harm is so awful and apparent. Yet, there is no right of religious liberty to engage in child and spousal abuse, or polygamy for that matter. The taboo against holding religious entities accountable is simply foolhardy.

“Too fearful of intervening in ‘religious enclaves’.” What is a “religious enclave”? Ever heard of David Koresh? What was so “awful” and “apparent”? We’re not talking about “religious entities” here. We’re talking about individual mothers and fathers whose parenting skills and civility have been highly praised by many of the people whom the State of Texas involved in the post-raid “triage”. What is “awful” and “apparent” is the psychological and emotional harm being inflicted on these people by the State of Texas.

In fact, enforcement of the polygamy laws could have stemmed many of these abuses. Yet, it is the rare prosecutor who will prosecute on the basis of the polygamy laws, despite the fact those laws are utterly clear and repeatedly have been upheld against constitutional attack . . .

Nonsense. “Polygamy laws” don’t exist. There are some bigamy laws. But they are not models of clarity. Nor is there evidence that all or even most of the FLDS now persecuted by the State of Texas practice bigamy or have engaged in any form whatsoever of child abuse. Finally, there is no evidence that demonstrates that bigamy or polygamy increases the chances of a child abuse. Judging from the written statements of mental health workers involved in the FLDS case, the opposite may well be true.

The largest enclave of FLDS resides in Bountiful, British Columbia. A misguided Canadian public official announced just yesterday that the government cannot go forward with a prosecution of polygamy against the FLDS (where the accounts of abuse are legendary), because of concerns about religious liberty. If Canadian law, though, protects polygamy, it also protects the child and spousal abuse that inevitably follow. That is not religious liberty, but rather religious licentiousness. American prosecutors have been marginally better, though there are many more cases out there that they ignore on daily basis.

If Professor Hamilton cannot produce hard evidence to support her assertion that “child and spousal abuse inevitably follow” polygamy her sincerity or competence as a law professor can justifiably be questioned. While she’s looking for hard evidence that polygamy “inevitably leads” to abuse (presumably she will do whatever it takes to avoid this “awful” thing from ever happening to anyone), she might spend a few hours considering the impact of pornography on spousal and child abuse. The evidence of that connection is clear.

If authorities (in TX, AZ, NV, and UT) had vigorously enforced the laws against polygamy, we would not have dangerous cults like the FLDS that are premised on extreme obedience of women and girls to domineering men and the disposal of teenage boys. Instead of preventing systemic abuse and neglect, authorities have been timid in the face of specious claims of religious liberty. It cannot be said often enough: no public official should tread lightly in the face of child abuse even if those perpetrating the abuse don the cloak of religion.

No child abuse has been proven. If the authorities can present before a jury legally sufficient proof of abuse as to each an every child family currently held captive by the State of Texas, then I will stand down.

The sheer amount of statutory rape in the FLDS culture (along with physical abuse and neglect) is staggering, but it took the FBI years to put their prophet, Warren Jeffs, on the Ten Most Wanted List and then to apprehend him for taking underage girls across state lines to be married to older men. . .

Huh? Again, Professor Hamilton demonstrates her bigotry by stereotyping an entire people as committing a crime for which only one individual member stands convicted. What is her evidence of the “sheer amount of statutory rape” in the FLDS culture? On what evidence does she base such a horrendously inflammatory, defamatory statement? A professor of law at a reputable school should know better.

He [Jeffs] was convicted in Utah for his involvement in the “marriage” of a 14-year-old girl to a 19-year-old boy and will face further state and federal charges in separate proceedings. His conviction alone should have put all authorities in the jurisdictions where the sect resides on the alert to rescue the women and children. (The boys do not fare well, either, as many are abandoned in adolescence in order to keep the ratio of men to girls favorable for the men.)

Again, Hamilton makes broad claims of wrongdoing without any evidence of such wrongdoing on the record in relation to the people she seeks to hold accountable. In the material below, we begin to get a sense of the veiled bigotry that apparently motivates Professor Hamilton. She’s got a thing against Mormons. Read carefully.

Second, Hollywood has romanticized polygamy. Thanks to actress Rita Wilson, the fundamentalist Mormons’ practice of polygamy has been glamorized in the nauseating HBO series, Big Love. When the members of Tapestry, a group of formerly polygamous wives fully (and sadly) educated on how the FLDS operates, objected to the show before it even appeared, she ignored their entreaties.

Big Love is business, obviously, but it’s business that profits from the abuse of women and children. Hollywood pays tremendous attention to suffering children in Africa, but which ones have stood up for the American child victims of sex abuse at the hands of polygamist Mormons? . . .

There is no such thing these days as a “polygamist Mormon”. The last ones died out long ago. And the horseplay portrayed in Big Love bears no resemblance whatever to polygamy as it was practiced in the early days of the “real” Mormon Church or, I gather, in today’s FLDS community. Professor Hamilton’s suggestion that it does shows how little she knows about the subject of her writing. But such factual nuances are apparently too fine for Professor Hamilton’s rough-hewn truth detector.

It is a sad fact that American children who are victims of child sex abuse in all categories (clergy abuse, incest, teacher abuse, etc.., etc.) receive far less attention and support than foreign children. Do you know why children’s issues are so difficult to get through state and federal legislatures? Children’s advocates will tell you: “Children don’t vote.” It’s also because too many wealthy adults don’t give to suffering American children.

Third, as a culture, we are slow to react to evidence of child sex abuse. We worry about tarring the reputation of adults far more than we do about early intervention when a child is in trouble. It takes a whole culture for children to be sexually and physically abused — adults to do it and others to take no action when they suspect what is happening. The worst thing that could happen in the El Dorado situation is that the apparent stonewalling by a number of the adults convinces authorities to restore these children to the cult. Adult members who will not talk truthfully to authorities should be prosecuted for obstruction of justice. Every humanly possible effort needs to be made to protect the children from further abuse.

Professor Hamilton’s use of the word “cult” again betrays her religious bias. Apparently not for nothing was she invited as a visiting scholar the the Princeton Theological Seminary. The sad fact, contrary to Hamilton’s whining, is that authorities across the country are far too quick to separate children from parents. The evidence from Eldorado, Texas is that hundreds of happy, healthy children and parents (we call these units “families,” Prof. Hamilton) are now dramatically worse off psychologically, emotionally, financially and physically than they were two months ago.

The question that should be on everyone’s mind at this point is where is the girl who tipped off authorities? I am afraid to know the answer, to be perfectly honest.

Well, I think we all know now that Professor Hamilton doesn’t know what she’s talking about. Authorities have long conceded the “girl” was a hoax. But Hamilton should have sensed that right away. A law professor who can be so thoroughly snookered by government propaganda is arguably not worth the paper her diploma is written on.

That leaves the question of justice for all of the other children in the cult.

Because of the insular nature of the FLDS and the general culture’s failure to intervene earlier, it will likely take decades for FLDS victims to find the ability to come forward and demand justice from their perpetrators. They deserve whatever time they need to heal and to find that justice and, therefore, offer yet another reason to eliminate the statutes of limitations for childhood sexual abuse.

There’s that word, “cult,” again. Folks, I think Professor Hamilton is an over-the-top lefty lunatic with a bright streak of religious bigotry running down her backside. She’s a first-rate witch-burner. To suggest eliminating statutes of limitations for sex abuse would hand Texas CPS and its sister organizations all across the country an insurmountable weapon against political opponents everywhere. We would all live in mortal fear of a CPS witch hunt until the day we die. It’s an utterly ridiculous proposal. I’m left wondering, is Hamilton’s the best, most informed thinking that the Cardozo School has to offer on this subject? But Hamilton’s ilk are distressingly common in today’s United States of America. Bill O’Reilly has it right: we’re on the verge of losing the country, but not the way he thinks.