Nonpartisan
We transcend political divisions to focus on constitutional principles that protect all Americans.
Mission, vision, and values
A national civil-rights organization establishing and restoring constitutional safeguards in state family courts.
Our mission
The Due Process Project works to establish and restore constitutional safeguards in state family courts by documenting systemic Due Process and Equal Protection failures, advancing constitutionally grounded reform, and protecting the fundamental rights of individuals and families. We are a national, non-partisan civil-rights organization launching targeted pilot projects, beginning in Washington State, as part of a coordinated effort to bring state systems into alignment with constitutional requirements. Our work restores the constitutional protections the Supreme Court already requires in family-court proceedings.
Our work is organized around three core functions: Outreach, Education, and Action. Outreach brings families and data into view. Education provides the constitutional clarity needed to understand the system. Action implements that clarity through public education, legislative reform, and litigation.
Our vision
A country where state family-court systems operate with transparency, accountability, and full adherence to the United States Constitution — ensuring that every individual and family receives the Due Process and Equal Protection the law guarantees, no matter where they live.
Our values
Constitutionally grounded
Every initiative is rooted in the Fourteenth Amendment and established civil rights law.
Trauma-aware
We design every interaction with sensitivity to the experiences of those we serve.
Data-driven
We collect procedural indicators, not personal narratives, to build evidence for systemic reform.
Transparency
We believe public oversight of judicial proceedings is essential for a fair legal system.
Accountability
We create foundations for holding the system accountable through documented patterns.
Public-facing
Safe, structured, trauma-aware engagement is at the heart of everything we do.
The data project
Documenting constitutional irregularities nationwide through procedural indicators.
What we collect
- Whether hearings occurred
- Whether evidence was reviewed
- Whether findings were made
- Whether ADA accommodations were provided
- Whether private actors exercised judicial power
- Whether appellate review was accessible
- Targeted case facts
What we do not collect
- Personal stories
- Gendered narratives
- Allegations against individuals
- Personal diagnoses
- Private family law case details
- Arguments for a personal lawsuit
Your experience becomes part of a state and nationwide pattern that will be used to inform legislation, support federal intervention, and expose systemic failures. Share your case.
Washington State as an example
Why Washington is our first case study for constitutional reform. Washington is uniquely positioned for a constitutional pilot because it exhibits:
- A statutorily affirmed citizen-state inversion: the state court may restrict at the lowest civil standard, and the parent may only overcome the restriction at the highest standard, RCW 26.09.191.
- Rulemaking without legislative review
- Internalized judicial oversight
- Expanded immunity doctrines
- Unchecked delegation to private actors
- Inconsistent county practices
- Limited appellate access
These conditions create a closed system where constitutional drift is measurable and predictable.
Review the Washington analysis · Washington legislator contacts · the HB 2735 hearing
A national civil rights movement
We collaborate with attorneys, researchers, and advocates across jurisdictions and the nation. Our goal is to build a national framework for constitutional accountability in state courts.
Why due process matters in family court
Family courts are run by the states, but that does not mean they operate outside the Constitution. When a state interferes with a parent’s fundamental right to raise their child, the Constitution requires meaningful due process. That includes real evidence, real procedures, and real protections before the government can restrict a parent’s liberty.
Parental rights are among the most protected liberty interests in American law. When the state seeks to limit them, it must meet a heightened standard, clear and convincing evidence, because the stakes are that high.
Due process is the safeguard that keeps government power in check. It is the foundation of fairness. It is the American way.
What current research reveals
Across the country, families report strikingly similar experiences in family courts: inadequate notice, rushed or truncated hearings, decisions based on unsworn allegations, and the inability to present evidence or cross-examine witnesses. These patterns reflect what legal analysts describe as widespread procedural failures that undermine the constitutional protections guaranteed to parents when the state intervenes in matters involving their children. The constitutional standard is clear — parental rights are fundamental liberty interests, and the state must provide heightened safeguards, including meaningful notice, a real opportunity to be heard, and decisions based solely on evidence in the record. Yet none of the sources identify a single state where these protections are applied consistently. Instead, they describe a system marked by inconsistency, elevated risk of erroneous deprivation, and recurring departures from due-process norms.