Leading the Effort to Dismantle Family Courts: NH Representative JD Bernardy

In New Hampshire, family courts have outwardly been a two-decade battleground between parents and the legislature—those striving to restore due process and accountability, while others are committed to normalizing an irretrievably broken system—yet harm to parents and children continues unabated. Unsurprisingly, meaningful corrective provisions for due process, appeals, and redress options are notably absent from NH families, while the very laws that established this profitable system remain safeguarded. Representative JD Bernardy recognized the critical importance of reform and is leading the push to pass NH’s HB652, aimed at overhauling how family legal matters are handled. “It is our duty to restore constitutional due process and integrity to our state for the people,” he said.

NH’s administrative family court system was enacted through legislation and can only be removed through legislative action. This entity is a self-governing administrative court system where subjective rules and preferred opinions are applied, rather than laws and evidence.

U.S. Supreme Court decisions—Loper Bright v. Raimondo, Corner Post v. Board of Governors, and Jarkesy v. SEC—exposed the limitations of administrative court tribunals that were implemented to deal with technical or scientific case matters. If applied to people, basic logic could have predicted unimaginable harm. Parents and children have been left unprotected from the administrative court contracts and contractors, without any viable means of recourse.

When a system consistently favors agencies like BCSS, DCYF, YDC, and a broad network of independent family legal service providers—at the expense of families—the purpose of the separation of powers and integrity has disintegrated. NH Representative JD Bernardy asks, "What is the one thing these three entities have in common?" He answers, "The family court."

The system pursues Title IV funding. This involves creating at least one parent as the absent parent—despite parents being fully engaged—and not actually absent. This is unjust, it harms both the parent and child, depriving both of precious childhood years as time ticks away.

Bernardy stated, “When I hear grandstanding about appeals, I see it as a superficial and hollow assertion, since there isn’t any guaranteed due process upon entering family court.” An appeal is a costly and time-consuming process that drains parents’ of their finances and assets—often amounting to tens of thousands of dollars or more—only after they’ve already exhausted resources in family court. The system thrives on constructing a case profile tailored to specific funding criteria, which leads to instability and increased costs for families. Meanwhile system stakeholders continue egoistic blaming of the family for the resulting circumstances that arise.

After speaking with numerous parents, Bernardy authored HR14 in 2023 to establish a legislative committee investigating due process issues within the family court system. HR14 passed unanimously out of committee. Last-minute House maneuvers prevented full implementation of an investigation, replacing it with a limited research committee instead.

In fall 2024, after two years of hearings within a narrowing scope, the special committee failed to produce a meaningful report. Instead, it maintained the status quo with unremarkable conclusions. Although bureaucrats might be content, this repetitive continuation only maintains what’s broken and will never stop the accumulating harm to parents, children and the state. Family court survivors continue to emerge, many are now adults.

Recognizing the volume of families harmed and the oppressive nature of the data, Bernardy was compelled to act again, introducing HB652 in 2025 to abolish the family court entirely. “It’s unconscionable! This is not a partisan issue, nor is the system salvageable.”

The Representative highlights systemic failures surrounding the lack of due process and the absence of evidence-based decision-making, as major flaws of the current system. Any expectations of law enforcements are very limited, as the legal statutes were written to uphold the administrative tribunal systems instead of the best interests of the people. “Any system that claims to prioritize families ‘best interest’ should actually prioritize the family, not commoditize them.”

“Families spend years in administrative courts without discernible cause.” Bernardy continued, “To put this into perspective, about 80% of all NH family cases settle amicably without ever appearing in the courtroom. The remaining 20%—thousands annually—are adversely affected by this process. Affecting families of all income levels and demographics, challenging the very flawed notions of what constitutes family needs.” He emphasized, “The process is largely fabricated, void of truth and imposed on unsuspecting families who do not realize it's not a court of law.” Like most administrative systems, it profits from expanding services even if unjustified. If parents resist, they can face retaliatory actions.

Parents have reported patterns of systemic behaviors—such as unwarranted surveillance, unauthorized access to communications, unnecessary services and other disruptive tactics—appearing to intentionally create chaos to destabilize and isolate family members. Complaints describe a process that employs coercive tactics that strip away rights, freedom of movement and resources without due process, using access to children as leverage.

The Representative has met with AZ Senator Mark Finchem, who became the face of Arizona’s unapologetic 2025 Ad Hoc Committee inviting citizens to share their family court experiences openly. Chairman Finchem did not hold back and encouraged citizens to state names, courts, and tell their experiences.

With a little thought, it's easy to conclude the Family Court system did not just appear sporadically in various states; it was taught through common resources and organizations for years. A coordinated effort is underway, aligning with multiple states united around the egregious harm to families. While family court stakeholders focus on maintaining relevance and resources, parents refer to their children, time, family and community relationships as their most valuable resources.

Representative Bernardy has become the leading advocate for the nation’s first bill calling for a comprehensive dismantling of the administrative tribunal system handling family legal matters. He asserts, “The administrative courts were intended for specialized technical matters and have always been ill-suited for any family legal matters.”

“Any system that overrides individual protections and constitutional guarantees is not a system of justice. This should never have been normalized as acceptable in NH. When justice is bypassed, it is justice denied for parents, children and our communities,” Bernardy asserted.