The System’s Two Speeds: Maryland Moves Fast to Take Custody, Slow to Answer for It
Four Maryland cases reveal a troubling pattern: the state moves quickly to remove children from parents but far more slowly when government agencies or courts are held accountable.
Maryland Must Act: The Legislature Cannot Ignore the Systemic Failures Exposed by Clarke v. Gibson
The Maryland Supreme Court's ruling in Clarke v. Gibson reveals critical flaws in the state's protective-order system, which often deprives parents of rights without sufficient evidence. To restore fairness, lawmakers must implement statutory reforms,…
What Clarke v. Gibson Really Means for Domestic Violence Survivors: Stronger Protections, Clearer Evidence, and a More Stable Path to Safety
The Maryland Supreme Court's decision in Clarke v. Gibson strengthens protections for domestic violence survivors by ensuring that protective orders are based on evidence and not merely on disbelief. This ruling clarifies the requirements for stability…
After Clarke v. Gibson: What Maryland’s Landmark Ruling Means for False Accusations and Custody Warfare
The Maryland Supreme Court's decision in Clarke v. Gibson mandates that protective orders must be supported by substantial evidence rather than assumptions or credibility findings. This ruling addresses the misuse of protective orders in custody…
Maryland Supreme Court Issues Major Protective-Order Ruling: Clarke v. Gibson Resets the Standard for Evidence, Due Process, and Parental Rights
The Maryland Supreme Court’s Clarke v. Gibson ruling strengthens due process protections in protective-order cases and demands real evidence before restricting parental rights.