Some, or all, of Tarrant County CPS might be moved out of Judge Alex Kim’s courtroom
Tarrant County district judges are expected to decide next week whether new Child Protective Service cases should be moved from the 323rd Family District Court and split between the other six Tarrant County family district judges.
The 323rd Family District Court is headed by Judge Alex Kim at the Scott D. Moore Juvenile Justice Center, at 2701 Kimbo Road in Fort Worth. Kim handles all new CPS and juvenile delinquent cases.
The possible move follows questions raised by Judge David Evans about whether rules over how cases are assigned have been followed. It also follows several instances in which Kim’s judgment has been questioned, although judges would not speak to the specific reasons factored into the discussion.
Kim declined to comment.
Evans, who presides over the 48th Judicial District Court in Tarrant County, began a discussion on the allocation of CPS cases and “the possible reallocation of some or all of those cases to Family District Court” during a Board of District Judges meeting last month, according to a draft of the meeting minutes obtained through a records request.
A committee was formed to assess the allocation of CPS cases, according to the meeting minutes.
During an earlier meeting by the Tarrant County Juvenile Justice Board, Evans said there was a 50 percent increase of CPS and juvenile cases over the last five years and that cases should have been assigned to judges by random selection.
Evans alleged that the local rules in assigning CPS cases have not been followed but didn’t go into detail about what those rules are.
Currently, any new CPS case is automatically assigned to the 323rd Family District Court. If a CPS case is formed out of an existing court case — such as a divorce — then the CPS case remains with the original judge.
The possible shift in assignments would be a significant change to the system, attorneys say, as a majority of CPS cases have gone through the 323rd District Court since at least the 1980s.
Shifting hundreds of CPS cases to the six family courts downtown would raise logistical questions, as well, including how staff would be moved so cases could be heard in a timely manner.
A day after the Jan. 22 meeting, Judge Jerry Hennigan, who presides over the 324th District Court downtown and is the local administrative judge, stressed that the possibility was simply discussed, but not decided on.
“It would be a change, certainly, if there’s any changes made,” Hennigan said. “But there’s been no decision made. This is really preliminary at this point.”
At the time, Hennigan declined to discuss specific reasons for the discussion.
“At this point, there’s nothing negative about anybody,” he said. “This is just trying to determine if it’s better to reallocate cases or not. We have not gotten into it.”
The board is set to discuss the issue Thursday at a special meeting of the District Board of Judges, according to an email obtained by the Star-Telegram through a records request.
On Feb. 6, an email was sent on behalf of Hennigan, informing the board members that a specially called meeting was set for Feb. 20 at 12:15 p.m. to “receive the recommendation of the committee appointed to study the allocation of CPS cases and to discuss and determine the necessity of the reallocation with adequate support of said cases.”
In the email, Hennigan stressed that it’s important a quorum be present, and that agendas would be sent to members at the appropriate time.
An agenda for next week’s meeting was posted online Thursday afternoon, indicating that the board would take action on the matter.
A representative of Evans’ office told the Star-Telegram Thursday that Evans, who serves as the presiding judge for the Eighth Administrative Judicial Region, which encompasses areas of North Central Texas, was not in a position to comment.
Judge Ruben Gonzalez, who presides over the 432nd District Court and was in attendance at the Jan. 22 meeting according to the minutes, declined to comment Thursday as to reasons for the discussion.
District Court Judge Judith Wells said it would be improper for her to comment because the meeting hasn’t been held yet.
“This is something we may or may not do,” she said. “It’s up for a vote, and it just depends on the feelings of the judges after hearing the report from the committee.”
This is a decision the board, as far as she knows, has not been asked to make in the past.
The Fort Worth Star-Telegram called the other 15 district judges who were present at the January meeting and calls were not immediately returned.
Reactions to the potential shift have varied among current and former CPS attorneys.
Kimberly Dewey, a Fort Worth attorney who is board certified in child welfare law, said changing how CPS cases have been heard for decades in Tarrant County raises a slew of logistical questions that could negatively impact children’s safety if cases are delayed in getting heard as a result.
If CPS cases are shifted away from the 323rd District Court, hundreds of child welfare cases would have to be heard at the family courts downtown — which already have full dockets — and would likely require personnel to be shifted around, she said.
What’s more, changes are already headed to how CPS cases are handled in Tarrant County. Starting March 1, Our Community Our Kids, a Fort Worth child placement agency that is a division of ACH Child and Family Services, is set to be the entity responsible for handling case management, rather than CPS.
While some have raised concerns about controversial decisions and judgments Kim has made since he took office, Dewey said she feels they don’t warrant such a disruptive and unprecedented change in Tarrant County’s court system.
“To pull all of these cases and to cause that much disruption, at the end of the day, he was elected by the people of Tarrant County, and he was specifically elected to handle CPS cases,” Dewey said.
Anthony Simpson, a former CPS attorney who stopped taking CPS cases when Kim was elected, said if the board decides to move CPS cases to the downtown courtrooms, he believes it would be beneficial for those families.
“When you think practically, it’s a good idea,” he said. “There are more courts that can handle the cases. Cases will move quicker and get more attention from the judges than they’re currently getting.”
Though district judges who spoke with the Star-Telegram wouldn’t comment on the specifics of why they want to move cases, Simpson said he believes some controversial decisions made by Kim have played a factor.
There have been at least four times in the last year when Kim’s decisions have been questioned, including:
▪ Kim was seen on security footage hosting a late night poker game with friends at the Juvenile Justice Center in August. Kim smoked a cigar in the building, and security officers reported that his office “was smoky.” Juvenile offenders are housed in the same facility, and county officials said Kim broke a no smoking ordinance that he is supposed to enforce.
▪ During a hearing on whether to transfer a juvenile offender who had been involved in a capital murder case to adult prison or probation, Kim went against the recommendation of several Texas Juvenile Justice Department employees who said the girl only participated in the crime because she was a victim of sex trafficking and one of her traffickers was involved.
Kim ruled to have the teenager transferred to prison on her 19th birthday and told her, “I believe you went more or less willing along with the opportunity that the traffickers provided for you.” Several people who advocate for sex trafficking victims spoke against Kim’s comment, alleging the judge does not understand how young people become victims of sex trafficking. The case was appealed, Kim was recused and the case was assigned to another judge. The teenager was released on probation.
▪ Kim was recused from a case when he assigned an emergency restraining order against Cook’s Children hospital to himself in November. The family of Tinslee Lewis filed a lawsuit against the hospital when doctors said the 1-year-old was going to be removed from life-support. Tinslee’s entire life has been spent in the hospital’s intensive care unit, and doctors have said her condition will never improve.
The legal battle against the hospital began with the help of Texas Right to Life attorneys. When Tinslee’s family filed an emergency stay to keep the hospital from removing the life support, Texas Right to Life asked Kim to sign a temporary restraining order, which he did, according to court documents. Lawyers for the hospital argued that Kim, who received campaign donations from Texas Right to Life, improperly assigned the case to himself, which called his impartiality into question.
▪ Appointments of court-appointed special advocates, often known as CASAs, who represent children’s best interests in cases of abuse and neglect have sharply declined over the past year in the 323rd District Court. A group that trains the volunteers alleges that Kim is putting vulnerable children at risk as a result.
This story was originally published February 14, 2020 at 6:00 AM.
