Needless to say, officials in California were livid. But the Texas court wasn't backing down.
In a later ruling that relied on a controversial legal judgment, Meurer used a provision of the Hague Convention, an international compact that deals, in part, with child custody, to take full (rather than temporary/emergency) jurisdiction of the case. Ordinarily, the state where a custody case begins maintains jurisdiction for the life of the case, under the dictates of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, which governs questions of custody between states.
Scott Musgrove
Paul Trapani
Related Content
More About
But Meurer seized jurisdiction, gave custody of the children to Schmidt (and supervised visitation to Saavedra), and ruled that "the children shall not be removed from the jurisdiction of this court for any reason until further orders of the court." Saavedra's lawyer has begun the process to appeal that ruling in Texas, arguing that Meurer did not have jurisdiction to hear the case because the children were in Texas illegally.
Without explanation, Meurer recused herself from the case last month, saying only that she had received information outside the courtroom regarding the case.
Two things are very evident in the workings of the various legal cases surrounding Debra Schmidt: There is no longer any such thing as a routine procedure, and almost everyone involved is extraordinarily angry.
Even something as seemingly ordinary as a bail hearing in the Hayward branch of the Alameda Criminal Courts last month seemed oddly heated. The matter at hand was Schmidt's request for reduction of her $100,000 bail. Her attorney, Rollie Pennington, a veteran of Central Valley courts, argued without irony that Schmidt was not a flight risk. In response, Hutchins asked that bail be increased to $200,000.
Judge Joseph Hurley probed the issue of Schmidt's children, particularly why they were still in Texas. In short order, tempers flared. Despite her lawyer's admonishments to the contrary, Schmidt argued with the judge over the facts of the case, while Hutchins and Pennington sparred over rulings of the Texas court. As the dust settled, Hurley issued an order revoking bail altogether until Schmidt, who is still incarcerated, brings her children back to California, in which case bail would be set at $50,000. Of course, the move would violate the Texas court order that the children not leave that state -- a judicial order that, Hutchins argued, Schmidt could have changed.
So, in essence, a California judge ordered Schmidt to ask a Texas judge to allow her to bring her children to California to be placed in the care of Alameda County Child Protective Services -- the same department that has officially determined that the children are better off in Texas.
Schmidt refused. "Under no circumstances will I bring my children to California," she says from jail. "We've never received any protection or justice in California."
