Sharing is caring!

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Henry Herrera

Telephone: +1-301-801-0608

Email: info@saveservices.org

Delusional: Lawsuit Demands NY Courts Discriminate Against Fathers in Child Custody Cases

WASHINGTON / May 22, 2026 – A group calling itself “The Women’s Coalition” filed a federal lawsuit earlier this week in New York State. Forty-one named women, joined by 100 unnamed Jane Does, are asking a federal judge to rule that New York’s family courts discriminate against mothers in child custody cases (1).

Feminist activists are calling the case a civil rights breakthrough — a claim that is directly contradicted by the evidence.

Tender Years Doctrine in Disguise. The Complaint argues that mothers are almost always a child’s primary bond and caregiver, and that any ruling which fails to weigh this factor heavily is “discriminatory” (1). This is the “tender years doctrine” in all but name — the old rule that mothers should automatically get custody of young children. New York courts abandoned this doctrine 50 years ago as illegal sex discrimination (2). The U.S. Supreme Court has been equally clear: Under Craig v. Boren, no state may favor one sex over the other without clearing a high constitutional bar (3).

Mothers Already Receive the Lion’s Share of Custody. The U.S. Census Bureau reports that 80% of the nation’s 12.9 million custodial parents are mothers (4). An 80-to-20 outcome cannot be considered as evidence of bias against mothers.

Discredited Research. The Complaint relies heavily on a 2020 study by Joan Meier, which claims that mothers raising abuse allegations are “discredited” 59% to 98% of the time (1). That study has been strongly criticized for selection bias, miscoded cases, and methods that pre-load its conclusions. The leading rebuttal is Lorandos and Bernet’s Parental Alienation: Science and Law, the standard reference work in the field (5).

Constitutional Inversion. The Plaintiffs ask the court to apply “strict scrutiny” — the most rigorous constitutional test — but only against fathers (1). They want sex discrimination to be forbidden when it hurts mothers, and required when it helps them. The Fourteenth Amendment does not work that way (3).

The Complaint’s other main sources are a 1986 New York task force report and a 2002 California NOW pamphlet (1) — 40 and 24 years old, respectively.

In short, the Complaint asks a federal court to discriminate against fathers as the cost of “equal protection” for mothers — and to do so while citing antiquated and discredited reports. Such delusional claims demonstrate feminism’s preference for a gynocentric narrative over data and evidence.

SAVE – Stop Abusive and Violent Environments – is a 501(c)3 organization working to assure due process, fairness, and equal opportunities for men.

Links:

1. The Women’s Coalition et al. v. State of New York et al., Civil Action No. 1:26-cv-04188 (S.D.N.Y., filed May 19, 2026). https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/?q=1%3A26-cv-04188
2. Watts v. Watts, 350 N.Y.S.2d 285 (N.Y. Fam. Ct. 1973). https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2057418/watts-v-watts/
3. Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. 190 (1976). https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/429/190/
4. U.S. Census Bureau, Custodial Mothers and Fathers and Their Child Support: 2017, Report P60-262 (issued May 2020). https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2020/demo/p60-262.html
5. Lorandos, D. & Bernet, W. (Eds.). (2020). Parental Alienation: Science and Law. Charles C. Thomas Publisher. https://www.ccthomas.com/details.cfm?P_ISBN13=9780398093273