Could you please expalin why this is a bad law?
Because it uses a number of rationales to assume something “may” happen. So it takes action against someone who has not committed a crime. Like any law based on “good intentions” rather than facts, it is wide open for abuse. Excerpts-
The act also includes a wide range of activities that may indicate a planned abduction including abandoning employment, liquidating assets, obtaining travel documents or travel tickets, or requesting the childs school or medical records.
The act lists a number of specific measures that a court may order. These include imposing travel restrictions, prohibiting the individual from removing the child from the State or other set geographic area,
If abduction appears imminent, a court may issue a warrant to take physical custody of the child, direct law enforcement officers to take steps to locate and return the child, or exercise other appropriate powers under existing state laws. A warrant to take physical custody is enforceable in the enacting state even if issued by different state. The court may authorize law enforcement officers to enter private property, or even to make a forcible entry at any hour, if the circumstances so warrant.
Take note in the last sentence, they are talking about forcible entry to take the child - even if nothing has happened yet, but only on the presumption that a possible abduction is “imminent”.
I know that many kids are abducted by non-custodial parents, but this is certainly a slippery slope and not the answer to the problem.
If you read the law, the problems are self evident.
Essentially, A judge or spouse/former spousecan accuse you of planning to engage in a felony (child abduction) and bring the charge in his/her civil court.
You are ‘guilty’ simply by tmeeting any ONE of the factors on a long list. Many of these factors are ordinary activities. Essentially every AMerican meets two to three factors on the list.
The case can be brought ‘ex-parte’ meaning that you are not notified until after the fact.
If the court decides that you are an ‘exigent’ risk of fleeing, they can authorize the police to break into your house at any hour to take your kids. (The Eliane Gonzales treatment).
How many of the ‘risk’ factors do you meet?
Have you ever made travel plans for youself to another state?
Have you ever made travel plans for someone else in your family to another state (as in Texas or Florida)?
Do you own property in another State?
Do you not own property in your current State?
Did you pick up your child’s school records?
Did you pick up your child’s medical records?
Did you get your child’s birth certificate?
Do you have a family member who lives in another State?
Do you not have any family living in your current State?
This WIKI link provides more detail on the history of the bill.
Note all of the states that have considered it and declined to pass it (have not yet updated it for the five from last year).
The link to the New Jersey Law Commissions final report gives a passable explanation from the lawyers point of view as to why the law is bad. I managed to get them to review what the law actually did and not what it was claimed to do.