The recent removal of minor’s counsel Julie Levy from a child custody case underscores the ongoing necessity of journalistic oversight regarding alleged misconduct within California’s family courts, a development highlighted by independent investigative journalist Susan Bassi.
California’s family court system faces scrutiny following reports that an estimated three million hearings have proceeded without official record, a situation exacerbated by a court reporter crisis. This development has led to substantial public expenditure, including a $7.6 million contract for private reporting services and nearly $3 million in legal fees for minors’ counsel in Santa Clara County Superior Court, while simultaneously impeding the appellate rights of affected families.
In Orange County and Santa Clara County, the walls between the branches of government have been eroded by political appointments, conflicts of interest, and undisclosed relationships, resulting in a loss of public trust and financial resources.
Despite decades of warnings, California judges continue to appoint unvetted attorneys as minors counsel and “parenting coordinators” at significant cost to families and taxpayers, with a lack of transparency and oversight.
California’s family court system is under scrutiny for its use of minors counsel, who are appointed to represent children in custody disputes and can wield significant influence with little accountability, often at great financial cost to families and taxpayers.
A father is paying nearly $1,000 a week for court-ordered supervised visitation with his 4-year-old son, despite having no criminal record or history of domestic violence, while a political relationship between the judge and the mother’s attorney is at the heart of a judicial disqualification motion.
California parents are forced to pay private monitors hundreds of dollars per visit to see their own children under court-ordered supervision, while the state’s Professional Supervised Visitation system profits from family court dysfunction through secretive business training funded by taxpayers.
Two court observers were evicted from Judge Cindy Hendrickson’s courtroom in Santa Clara County Superior Court on February 7, 2025, after serving her a judicial disqualification motion alleging political bias and undisclosed conflicts of interest, while Hendrickson responded by downplaying her ties to WomenSV and failing to address her co-appointment with Ford to the county’s Domestic Violence Council.
By Fred Johnson, Susan Bassi and Lexi Logan In less than a month, voters in several California…
By Fred Johnson and Susan Bassi In the same week that California lawmakers killed a bill aimed…
By Susan Bassi, Fred Johnson and Luna Violetti Editor’s Note: Over 70 women have come forward following…
By Fred Johnson and Susan Bassi As budgetary challenges leave self-help centers understaffed and courtrooms without court…
By Fred Johnson and Susan Bassi Judges in Santa Clara County are raising eyebrows over their appointments…
By Robert J. Hansen & Susan Bassi Complaints from 53 women alleging Los Altos-based nonprofit WomenSV…
Nonprofit Exploits Ex-Wives of Silicon Valley Editor’s Note: The women interviewed for this story will be referred…
As she sat on the curb watching the police search her former San Jose home, her five-month…
The Fairness to Freedom Act of 2026 would guarantee federally funded legal representation for people who cannot afford attorneys while facing deportation, as advocates warn that immigrants without counsel are far more likely to be ordered removed from the United States.
More than 150 formerly incarcerated Californians and their allies convened at the state Capitol this week. They advocated for the principle that the completion of a criminal sentence should signify the conclusion of punitive measures, rather than initiating prolonged barriers to housing, employment, and economic stability.
A ProPublica analysis indicates a reduction of at least 776,000 children receiving Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits. This decline contradicts prior assertions by Republican proponents of President Trump’s signature domestic policy legislation, who maintained that program revisions would not adversely affect vulnerable populations.
An analysis of liberal political behavior suggests a tendency to prioritize the maintenance of the status quo, frequently advocating for calm and patience while simultaneously safeguarding existing systems. This perspective, the analysis indicates, often leads to the delegitimization of radical action, thereby exacerbating the suffering of marginalized communities.