IMPORTANT – Read this!
Dear Followers of Leon Koziol.Com
Please CALL the Heritage Foundation today at: (202) 546-4400 and ask them to help provide financial and organizational support for the John Parent case since this would more than likely fall under the category of Family and Marriage as listed under the “ISSUES” tab on their website. The following individuals are listed as contacts under this category: Christine Kim, Jennifer A. Marshall, Katherine Bradley and Robert Rector. Here is a link to Senior Management which also need to be contacted (Click Here). We encourage you to be persistent and relentless in your efforts to reach these individuals for the purpose of developing a meaningful dialogue with this organization.
Sadly, parenting rights continue to be ignored. However, nothing is going to change unless you decide to take immediate action TODAY!
Thank you in advance for your help!
Very truly yours,
October 2, 2012
I am frankly shocked at the dismissive tone of your e-mail today on the subject of a parenting rights case being considered by the Supreme Court of the United States. This is not simply a “custody” matter. It is a precedent seeking case designed to reduce divorce conflict and child exploitation by lawyers and an overbuilt government bureaucracy. In that vein, it is on all fours with conservative family values and the entire message routinely delivered to the public by your advertised champion, Rush Limbaugh.
You obviously missed the mark on the entire court filing attached to my e-mail after our telephone chat. Is there someone else in your organization that I can speak to on this subject which was referred to your attention? Much like women who secured equal rights in employment with the help of male sympathizers, I am certain that you will agree that discriminated fathers deserve similar support and treatment by our courts. I have successfully represented victims of gender discrimination and sexual harassment to make this fair statement to you as we continue to contact financial supporters of the Heritage Foundation with the help of our followers.
I look forward to hearing from you again, perhaps through a person with more time to devote to this crucial issue. We too are very busy people in our endeavors, as evidenced by the complexity of subject matter embodied by the Supreme Court filing. To reiterate, it took four years to work this case through the federal court system against the odds. Gay marriage activists are working before the same Supreme Court to have their similarly docketed case heard as we speak. Perhaps you will report on their efforts or simply wait to attack an inevitable outcome. Those efforts deserve an appropriate balance which is now found in our John Parent v State of New York case, docket no. 12-350. Please take a further look at our promotional efforts at Leon Koziol.com.
Very truly yours,
Leon R. Koziol, J.D.
President and Founder
Parenting Rights Institute
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 2:52 PM, Sheffield, Rachel <Rachel.Sheffield@heritage.org> wrote:
Hi Mr. Koziol,
I just wanted to let you know that I received your email with the attached Petition for Writ. Unfortunately, I don’t believe I will be able to assist you with your endeavors. We don’t generally focus on custody matters, and our workload is currently quite full. I do wish you all the best.
The Heritage Foundation
214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE
Washington, DC 20002
From: Leon Koziol [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 2:44 PM
To: Sheffield, Rachel
Subject: Privacy Limits and Equality in Divorce and Family Court
Attached is the Petition for Writ docketed by the Supreme Court this past week which we discussed on the phone today. To summarize, this is a federal lawsuit pending before the highest court in our nation which originated in Syracuse, New York. The case has worked its way to Albany, New York City and finally Washington D. C. over a four year period of litigation and its aim is to eliminate unequal classifications (“custodial” and “non-custodial” parents) in most divorce and Family Court cases where parents remain jointly involved in childrearing processes.The fact of divorce or separation should not automatically lead to custody and support battles because such processes not only harm our children but they reward lawyers who orchestrate needless controversies.
It is a problem which is harming our family structure, criminal justice system, worker productivity, health care and moral fiber as a nation. Few cases locally make it this far, and although the high court hears only a small percentage of petitions filed worldwide, this case has a unique appeal given the lack of Supreme Court precedent on the subject of privacy violations. When the state forces parents to war over their own children, it opens the door to a monitoring process which gets into every aspect of our homes, careers and finances. The John Parent case is a classic example which, like Roe v Wade, features a fictitious name allowed by a lower federal judge to represent all “parents similarly situated”. We were unable to convert this case into a class action due to a lack of resources, but it remains a test case for purposes of setting a limit upon the powers of the state to interfere with sensitive childrearing practices in the privacy of our homes. Of course it is not intended to encompass legitimate cases of child abuse or neglect which justify state interevention and custody titles.
Its significance is illustrated by five cases involving gay marriage which reached the Supreme Court recently, but only one (out of New York state) was actually docketed for consideration. This is the only case I am aware of regarding parental privacy and equality which is being considered. A decision should be handed down by Christmas but any story on the subject should be more in the way of a special report or documentary which could easily obtain national attention. The case also features free speech and free press issues after I criticized my own profession for its unethical practices in domestic relations courts. Rather than responding with long overdue reform, the local bar simply turned its guns on the messenger and suspended my law license after 23 successful and unblemished years as a civil rights lawyer. It is an ordeal which reads like a John Grisham novel.
This is not the first time I sacrificed myself for the sake of “the little guy” in race, gender, religion and police brutality cases. For example, I was forced from my position as chief counsel for the City of Utica in 1997 when I declared the mayor’s media gag order at the time unconstitutional. I successfully sued the perpetrators, and you can look up the case on-line by googling Koziol v Hanna, 107 F.Supp.2d 170 (NDNY 2000). I also represented a landowners group and got the Turning Stone casino gaming compact declared unconstitutional in June, 2004 (after appearing on “60 Minutes”), see Oneida Indian Nation v Oneida County, 132 F. Supp. 2d 71 (NDNY 2000); see also Patterson v City of Utica, 370 F.3d 322 (CA 2, 2004)(involving $333,000.00 jury verdict on a civil rights case). Simply stated, this is a well prosecuted lawsuit despite the criticisms and retaliations from lawyers and judges. As the victim and sponsor of the John Parent v State of New York case now before the Supreme Court, this is a petition having far reaching potential and implications. Your interest is very commendable and a credit to your profession. Feel free to contact me anytime. Thank you.
Leon Koziol, J.D.