In CFJ's over five years of experience, many of our members have taken all the possible steps to find remedy and/or justice in the State of New Mexico judicial system, including the District Courts, the Court of Appeals, and the Supreme Court. Our web site exposes some of the many crooked associations and links among the three levels of the courts. It is not surprising that so many parents have ended up simply generating a record of massive ignorance of and refusal to follow the U.S. Bill of Rights on the part of the NM judiciary, including due process, equal access, and other basic rights. Some of the examples are extreme, and only a small portion of them are formally presented on our web site. Many other parents, not members of CFJ, have also fathomed their remedies in the New Mexico court system, and are left wounded and discouraged by the battle.

Therefore, we now present to you, in order to share resources and make it easier for those who follow, what has been learned about filing civil rights actions in federal court as a remedy to the total lack of respect for U.S. citizens' rights, including the right to parent, here in New Mexico. Our hope is that with such a concerted effort in bringing to light through formal legal cases the sins of the State court and its offices, parents may get relief from the massive oppression they have undergone.

• federal case law shows that judges are not necessarily immune (all links PDF - )
  • Randall v Brigham, 74 U.S. 523 (1868) All judicial officers are exempt from liability, in a civil action, for their judicial acts. . . unless perhaps where the acts in excess of their jurisdiction are done maliciously or corruptly.
  • Bradley v Fisher, 80 U.S. 335 (1871) judicial immunity
  • Title 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 Remedy for deprivation of federal constitutional rights.
  • 125 more cases, briefly 
  • Atwood v Fort Peck Tribal Court et al Federal courts take up family court cases
  • Buckley v Fitzsimmons et al. (1992) prosecutors not entitled to absolute immunity
  • Kalina v Fletcher (1997) Section 1983 may create a damages remedy against a prosecutor for making false statements of fact in an affidavit supporting an application for an arrest warrant, since such conduct is not protected by the doctrine of absolute prosecutorial immunity
  • Kush et al. v Rutledge (1983) No allegations of racial or class-based invidiously discriminatory animus are required to establish a cause of action under the first part of 1985(2).
  • Ysias v Richardson et al. (2007) This claim arose from a children's court case and involves false charges of child abuse. Alleged counts include violation of civil rights, conspiracy, negligence, negligent supervision, negligent training, outrageous conduct, malicious prosecution, defamation of character, libel, slander, publication of facts placing plaintiff in a false light, and wrongful institution of legal proceedings.