By Donald Lee Pardue - Flickr: Still Waving, CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=17988968

District court judges in New York State are now demanding that a mother choose between her mixed-race child and her confederate flag.

As The Hill reports:

An appellate division of the state’s second highest court ruled in a 5-0 decision that a couple would retain joint custody of their child born in 2014, The Albany Times Union first reported. But Justice Stanley Pritzker wrote in the court’s ruling the woman has until June 1 to remove the rock from her driveway. Otherwise, it could factor “into any future best interests analysis.”

“Given that the child is of mixed race, it would seem apparent that the presence of the flag is not in the child’s best interests, as the mother must encourage and teach the child to embrace her mixed race identity, rather than thrust her into a world that only makes sense through the tortured lens of cognitive dissonance,” Pritzker wrote.

Pritzker wrote in the ruling the mother, identified as Christie BB in court documents, testified she had the rock in her driveway, which the judge declared a “a symbol inflaming the already strained relationship between the parties,” according to the Times Union. The mother told the court “she has never used any racial slurs in front of the child or at all.”

“As such, while recognizing that the First Amendment protects the mother’s right to display the flag if it is not removed by June 1, 2021, its continued presence shall constitute a change in circumstances and Family Court shall factor this into any future best interests analysis,” Pritzker wrote.

The demand from the judge that she remove her confederate flag adorned rock or risk having it factor into a future decision about whether she will potentially lose her child in a custody battle seems to a major violation of any traditional understanding of constitutional liberty.

Is the judge’s demand a violation of the first amendment, or is she merely attempting to ensure the child grows up in a home free of racism? Let us know what you think in the comments below.


Subscribe
Notify of
guest
43 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
John Kociuba
John Kociuba
1 month ago

Yeah! These lawyers and judges know best alright! Government pushing single parents, sexualizing minors, communism, anti cigarette but allowing a NARCO State [Mexico] to poison millions of families with heroin! Endless wars, decadence and deceit l! Tell the judge to go to hell!🇺🇸

Respectfully,
🔺️

David Baker
David Baker
1 month ago
Reply to  John Kociuba

Your mention of anti-tobacco campaigns by our government, particularly their concern about children being exposed to secondhand smoke, reveals the hypocrisy of liberals. The local casino allows smoking, and young children are dragged into that facility and exposed to lots of second hand smoke, while they witness their parents losing their nest eggs. (One couple left their infant child strapped in a car seat for hours in the adjacent parking garage while they gambled.) It’s surprising that a riotous crowd of liberals does not materialize daily to protest such heresy against one of their campaigns.

vladimir
vladimir
1 month ago
Reply to  John Kociuba

Don’t forget about globalist puppet, royal family and their opium drug trade, poisoning millions of globalist puppet, libby snow flake sheep .

Josephine Diaz
Josephine Diaz
1 month ago
Reply to  John Kociuba

This is so wrong. The judge crossed the line. What happened to the First Amendment? This judge is a liberal a**h**e.

jawad
jawad
1 month ago
Reply to  John Kociuba

“Do as I SAY, not as I DO.”

joe
joe
1 month ago

Jacka$$!

Emmett Nichols
Emmett Nichols
1 month ago

Seems that judge has overstepped the bounds of the 1st amendment. She should keep her mouth shut and resign from her position as a judge. She is not a judge but a lowdown arbiter.