Your entire point, NOP, seems to hang on the dual pillars of contemporary law and the special knowledge you have that 400+ kids were being abused. We all know there’s no other way to justify taking them away from their families by judicial fiat.
Of course, you also contradict yourself when you avoid this little problem with your logic by erecting your construct of legally damning the entire group simply because they are an entire group. As has been pointed, by precisely that same logic entire urban centers should be arrested and sent into foster care by one judge’s imperial decree.
That you add insult to injury by citing a constitutional right to freedom from abuse is not surprising. Of course, there is no such thing, not per se, but there are many enumerated rights that could and have led to just laws preventing harm. But again, the point is that your grasp on the principle issues here is tenuous at best, imaginary at worst.
Should there be a right to be free from abuse, then the State has, by any measure held in any sort of balance with all your appeals to a presumption of guilt, committed abuse. It has abused not only those enumerated rights, it has physically abused these children by forcing them into a hostile, inadequate, and statistically abusive foster care system and away from their parents.
Now, should there be adequate and just cause to believe that over four hundred children were being abused, then over four hundred children need protection. But since that is not at all in evidence, since you do not pre-convict entire communities any more than you do entire urban centers, given that the State is under far more constitutional pressure to honor individual liberties than the reverse, and given that your constitutional expertise is lacking, I’d say you haven;t gotten a thing of use in this debate.
You’ve only confirmed those suspicions and so I’ll close the same way I did before. One must conclude that you’ve replaced rights with fiat. You’ve made your fellows subject to majority whim. You’ve replaced a constitutional republic with a mob. You propose short-circuited the Bill of Rights in favor of a religion of State.
