NY judge rules child cannot travel to wedding

UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh posts this NY family court caae:

This is a dispute between two (2) parents, who have until now been able to recognize and resolve any differences relating to the child, who is seven (7) years old. The mother wishes to travel with the child to Israel to attend, on January 23, 2013, the wedding of Moshe Labin, the child’s maternal uncle, to Miriam Yitty Teitelbaum. ...

Whether the [parties'] agreement is valid and thereby the parties have joint custody but cannot reach an agreement on the limited issue of this child’s travel to Israel or the agreement is not valid and the issue is before this court de novo, under these particular facts and circumstances, the applicable standard is the best interest of the child....

The attorney for the child, who met with his client on one (1) occasion with the assistance of a Yiddish interpreter supplied by the mother, has taken the position, on behalf of his client, that his client would miss the mother if she were to travel to Israel, ...

At this juncture, it is not in this child’s best interest to require him to travel to Israel for a celebration; the emotional risk to him outweighs any benefit that conceivably would be derived from the experience. Furthermore, the mother did not demonstrate any serious adverse affects that would be contrary to the child’s best interests if he were to stay with the father during the time ...

This is a good example of the foolishness of the BIOTCh. This judge has intervened into a routine child-rearing matter, and forced his own personal religious prejudices on them.

The judges says that with more time "those issues can be explored during a trial after forensic evaluations of the parties and the child and an in camera interview of the child." That is even crazier. No evaluation or interview is going to result what is essentially a Jewish religious dispute.

Volokh's blog is popular with libertarian lawyers, but on this issue, he draws un-libertarian comments like this:

The judge did not see the couple arguing in the street and jump into the middle of the disagreement. At least one parent asked the judge for help. If you want to rant about somebody, rant about the parent or parents who brought it before a judge.

The parents have a right to make bad decisions, as long as they are lawful. The judge is the one who is acting unconstitutionally.