Nobody wants to end up in family court. But even in family court, there are rules that protect parents and children from overreach by judges. At least, there are supposed to be. 

But in September of 2025, two parents learned exactly how far outside the rules some judges are willing to go. George and Ashley (whose names are being changed to protect their privacy), appeared in court with an agreement in hand to resolve outstanding issues of child support and custody for their daughter. The trial was scheduled for that day, but the parents hoped to avoid a legal battle. 

Months earlier, at a prior hearing, both parents had been ordered by the court to take a routine drug test. Both tests came back positive at that time. Nevertheless, there were no allegations that either parent had harmed their child and there was no investigation by CPS. The case proceeded without incident.

Fast forward to September.

While the parents and their attorneys were negotiating outside the courtroom, the judge took another look at the case file and noticed the old drug test results, which she had previously overlooked. She immediately called everyone back into the courtroom—putting a stop to the negotiations.

What happened next stunned everyone in the room.

Without any warning, the judge–Judge Cherami Jenkins from Tarrant County–summoned Child Protective Services (CPS) into the courtroom and ordered CPS to take immediate possession of the parent’s child. 

CPS staff were as bewildered as the parents. Under Texas law, the removal of a child is considered an extraordinary action and cannot take place unless very specific requirements have been met. 

But CPS had not investigated the family. They didn’t even know who the family was. They had received no reports of abuse or neglect, and no allegations against the parents were on file. CPS was not even a party to the case–a legal prerequisite for any entity to be bound by a court order. Yet the judge ordered the child to be removed anyway and to be immediately placed with CPS. 

The judge’s only rationale? Months earlier, both parents had tested positive for drugs. What the judge ignored, however, was critical: As George’s attorney pointed out, his positive test was old and came from a one-time event. He had never used drugs since and had passed every subsequent drug test. There was no allegation that he had ever harmed or endangered his child. His attorney offered on the spot for George to take another drug test, but the judge refused. 

George’s attorney also protested that the removal of the child in this manner was not allowed under the law. CPS had done no investigation and had not gone through any of the procedures necessary for the removal of a child. Nevertheless, the judge ordered that the child be removed immediately and that “all periods of possession” would be controlled by CPS. 

The judge then threatened to hold in contempt anyone who was unwilling to go along with her order. 

The case represented a rare circumstance where a judge overtly abused her power over both the parents of a child and CPS at the same time. It was the equivalent of a judge accusing someone of a crime for the first time in open court, calling police to the courthouse, and ordering them to take the person to jail without any investigation. 

Attorney Kenia Ontiveros of the Ontiveros Law Firm in Dallas, along with Family Advocate Krista McIntyre, were representing George. They called Family Freedom Project and FFP Senior Fellow Chris Branson joined the case. 

FFP contacted senior leadership at CPS to make sure they were aware of the judge’s illegal order.

Within days, the tide began to turn. 

CPS began pushing back on Judge Jenkins’ order, knowing they had no authority to keep the child. A new hearing was scheduled. 

Back in the courtroom, the tone was inescapable: everybody knew that the prior order from the judge was a dramatic and indefensible overreach of power. 

In a new order, the judge walked everything back, returning the child to the father and positioning the case for the parents to continue negotiating their child custody agreement as they had been before. 

This outcome was not just a win, it was a powerful reminder that unchecked judicial power threatens every family. When a judge bypasses the law, families and children pay the price. 

While the judge and even CPS may walk away from a situation like this essentially unscathed, the family—and the child—pays the price of the forced separation and the eternal distrust of the system that it breeds.