Kelly Rutherford starts White House petition asking Obama to return her kids

The last we checked with former Gossip Girl star Kelly Rutherford, 46, her custody case was dismissed at the federal level. Rutherford’s children, Hermes, 8, and Helena, 5, live with their father, a German citizen, in Monaco. A judge gave Rutherford and her ex husband, Daniel Giersch, 50/50 custody in 2012 but ordered that the children could live with Giersch overseas after his US visa was revoked. Rutherford is thought to have been responsible for Giersch’s visa being revoked, which she denies despite the fact that her lawyer personally called the State Department to tip them off. Giersch has not yet applied for another visa after he was ordered to do by the California court. In the ruling dismissing this case, the federal court ruled that “the children have not been deported” and that “it would plainly be improper for the federal courts to assume jurisdiction over the case.

Legal experts thought that Rutherford might continue to fight for her children by appealing her case at the state level. As far as I’ve heard that hasn’t happened yet, but Kelly has started a White House petition urging the return of her children. In a statement to People Magazine, her lawyer called this “a political problem for President Obama and a constitutional problem for the courts.” I’m sure Obama will get right on that. Here is some of People’s report on this story:

The actress created an online White House petition Tuesday asking for a federal order to bring her two children back to the United States.

“This is a political problem for President Obama and a constitutional problem for the courts,” her attorney, Wendy Murphy, tells PEOPLE. “The president recently issued an executive order declaring that children born in this country to illegal immigrant parents must be allowed to remain in this country. Mr. Obama specifically talked about the importance of mothers and children being allowed to stay together in America. How could Kelly and her children not be entitled to at least the same legal protections?

“The petition exposes an important and very embarrassing situation for Mr. Obama,” Murphy says, “because if Kelly’s children are not rescued from involuntary expatriation to France, it would mean the President believes non-citizens are entitled to greater rights than citizens in this country.

“The federal court in New York that is currently reviewing this case has acknowledged this is an unprecedented situation, which means a ruling against Kelly’s children would put countless defenseless American children at risk for being shipped like luggage to live in a foreign country where they have no citizenship, and no rights as Americans.”

“I remember when she made the ruling, I just thought, ‘There’s something wrong here,” the former Gossip Girl star told PEOPLE earlier this month. “Not because of their father and I or anything – I’ve always wanted my kids to have a relationship with him, and I’ve really only encouraged that all along. When I went into court, I never asked for money, and I never asked for full custody. I just wanted what was right for them and their well-being moving forward.”

[From People]

The statement from Kelly’s lawyer reads like one of those “Thanks Obama” rants and not the funny/ironic ones. I don’t think this case has anything to do with Obama’s executive actions on immigration last year. He was trying to ensure that children born in the US to parents of illegal immigrants weren’t separated from their families by deportation of the parents. Rutherford’s children were separated from her by a custody judge, essentially, but she is able to visit them frequently throughout the year and they stay with her every summer. As the federal court stated in their ruling, the children remain US citizens and have not been deported.

Kelly’s White House petition, which currently has about 8,000 signatures and needs nearly 92,000 more, is kind of sad, though. I felt bad for her after reading it, but that doesn’t mean I think it’s accurate or that she should get her kids back. Here’s the text of her petition:

The undersigned hereby implore the Obama administration to return Kelly Rutherford’s children safely to the U.S.A.
At ages 2 and 5, Kelly Rutherford’s children were forced by a California judge to live in France with their German father, (nobody is French) after he claimed his U.S. visa was revoked, and he could not enter the U.S. The children’s appointed counsel said they should remain in the U.S., but the judge sent the children to France, solely because the father claimed he could not return to the U.S., even though NO evidence has been produced from any American official stating that the father was EVER denied entry into the U.S., and the father refused to request a visa. Instead, he filed court papers in Monaco, causing the children to be declared “habitual residents” subject solely to Monaco law. The father also recently filed papers seeking to strip Kelly of all parental rights.

[From Petitions.WhiteHouse.Gov]

That parenthetical statement, “nobody is French,” seemed out of place to me. This reads like Rutherford wrote it after a few Pinot Noirs. Notice that Rutherford’s side is not denying that Giersch’s visa was revoked, this has been established and it’s known that she’s the one who arranged this. (Or, at the very least, her lawyer did it without her knowledge, which belies belief.) They’re stating that there’s no evidence that Giersch could not return to the US and that he hasn’t tried. Yes I think it’s shady that he hasn’t applied for another visa and it does seem vindictive that he’s trying to strip Kelly of parental rights. (If that is even true.) However, judging from what she’s said in public I imagine that it must be worse behind the scenes. It’s telling that he’s barely commented on this case while she’s been all over the press.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

140 Responses to “Kelly Rutherford starts White House petition asking Obama to return her kids”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Lama Bean says:

    Girl, bye. She will get two signatures-hers and her attorney’s. I don’t understand why she doesn’t just move to Europe?

    • Zapp Brannigan says:

      I don’t understand why she does not move, surely one of those soap/drama type shows in the UK would employ her, she could effectively commute from France in a few hours and spend a lot of time with her kids that way. Get on Emmerdale Kelly or maybe Eastenders.

      Is she working much in the US does anyone here know? I think she just wants to “win” this battle at any cost.

      • denisemich says:

        She has wasted a bucket load of money on this crap. Her kids are in Monaco, so get a job in Europe dummy. She is the only person who doesn’t want to live in the tax-free paradise of Monaco.

        So tired of people that ruin their kids lives to one up the ex.

    • Belle Epoch says:

      I LOVE “lama bean” hehe!

      Yes totally agree. Just move already. She really seems deranged – like this is ‘t even about the kids any more.

      • applapoom says:

        Perhaps she wants the kids to grow up feeling american. She strikes me as that type of person.

        Beautiful kids though.

      • Sassy says:

        If she moved to Europe she would still have the same custody plan in place – 50/50. She would have them for the same amount of time that she now has them in the US in the summer.
        This happens in divorce.

    • Liv says:

      What an idiot this woman is. She was the one who wanted to cut the father off. Now it backfires and she wants Obama to solve the problem for her? She’s pretty crazy. No wonder that the father has no interest in requesting his visa. You can’t move little children around like toys just because the mother wants you too. This is on her, she should apologize and accept the situation.

      • CTgirl says:

        From what I’ve read she put it out there to authorities that her ex had issues with his permissions to be in the US after they had joint custody. She was unhappy with the joint custody and tried to get him thrown out of the country so that she would get sole physical custody and he would essentially get visitation. Her gamble didn’t pay off and the court reasoned that since they shared joint custody and he couldn’t live in the US that it was up to her to move. She tried to play the system and the system played her instead.

      • Boopybette says:

        The way this reads it sounds like some republican GOP person is advising her and thinks she can get a groundswell of anti Obama wingnuts to rally for her if they think HE is why she’s lost her kids. Which, girl please. I was on her side. Now this makes me question her judgment. By any means necessary, eh Rutherford? Even demonizing the black President some more? So along with the heinous act of giving us all affordable healthcare, and being born in Hawaii/kenya and being a Muslim, he’s guilty of children snatching. Kay. Hey Kelly…fire whomever is advising you now.

    • Talie says:

      That’s actually a good point. She could probably find employment easily on UK television based on her resume.

      • Chichi says:

        Yeah, not really. Far more successful, much younger TV actrors struggle to get work. Shes a middle aged TV actress, even in the States she is (short of a miracle) fated to guest star roles on crime dramas and bit parts on broadway if shes very lucky. This is not the time for her to step away from her professions epicenter especially now her savings are depleted. if she were to move now her options would revolve around either marrying a wealthy man or starting a new professional venture. Because I assure you, if it was so easy for Dlist middle aged American actresses to get steady paying acting work in England, there would be a tonne of them there already.

      • burnsie says:

        Chichi, I kind of agree with that. While this situation is definitely a clusterfcuk, and a lot of mistakes have been made, I don’t think it’s so easy for her to just pack up and move.

      • Msmlnp says:

        I agree with this as well. Also, hypothetically couldn’t she run into immigration and legalization issues regarding residency in another country herself?

    • Sarah says:

      I’ve wondered that too. If my son were halfway around the world and I couldn’t see him – I would move there! Set up a home over there and then come back to the states for whatever limited work she gets anymore.

      • Andrea says:

        Most Americans cannot fathom living outside of the US(or can’t afford it, but I know she probably can). Moving to another country much less Europe is a really strange and foreign concept to a lot of Americans. Most people say they don’t understand why I did so, moved to Canada, since America “is the best” at everything. If she has that mentality, she is uninterested in living abroad even for her kid’s sake.

      • Molls says:

        I moved to the UK from Montana.

        I was pregnant and I wanted our daughter to know her father, we were separated at the time.

        Fast forward eleven years and daughter two came along and so did a divorce.
        Now I am adrift in a foreign country with no family but will not leave as my ex will not let me take our daughters back to America.

        England is hardly a third world country, but it ain’t easy, trust.

      • AG-UK says:

        I am still with my hubby but no family here but my son now 14 and settled here so there you go. I long for long summers that are warm😀
        June will be 15 years now in London.

      • Dana m says:

        I too would have moved years ago!! She can find a job there like any of us could. I couldn’t bare to be without my kids and would take whatever job I could in a foreign country just to be with them. She is crazy. It’s obvious where her priorities are in her book.

      • Molls says:

        @AG-UK. Glad you are with your husband, and I do hope he is understanding when you get homesick.
        I like to think there are some success stories when it comes to marrying a foreigner.

    • AG-UK says:

      Getting visas in The UK aren’t as easy as they use to be. If she could get a job that would be ideal. She needs to look up Sky Atlantic as they produce shows with US cast now like Fortitude. I can’t see her down and out on Eastenders lol

    • holly hobby says:

      If Stanley Tucci can live full time in England while working in the states, she can too. Her plea to Obama is disingenuous at best. Obama was talking about ILLEGL immigrants’ children being allowed to stay in the US if they were born here. Her case is not the same thing. Who’s giving her legal advice? Attorneys r Us? All her attorneys sound like ambulance chasers.

      • ava7 says:

        Kevin Spacey, also. But let’s face it. KR doesn’t have the acting chops to get the same kind of big roles. And her children live in Monaco, not the UK, so she would still have to travel all the time to see them and to go to work. I think she made her bed and she’s just gonna have to lie in it.

    • MET says:

      If she moves to Europe she can no longer milk the “my babies have been stolen from me//they deserve to be with their (crazy) mother” money train.

  2. MrsB says:

    I do feel bad for any parent separated from their children, but in this case, I just don’t understand why she doesn’t move to them. It’s not like she has a normal 9-5 job she has to be at every day. Surely, she could make this situation work better than what is going on now.

    • Gea says:

      She must be in personal pain, defited over and over again and still standing still in order to bring her kids back to US for good. She made the whole situation worste by archesrating the whole revoking visa for her ex and now she is really suffering consequences. For the sake of the children they have to find safe heaven, those poor kids must be going troughs so much . I really hope, this whole situation will be resolve for good.

  3. Wilma says:

    If I were her ex I would be kind of scared to send my kids to stay with her for the summer. She will probably try to keep them in the States.

    • Liv says:

      What I thought. She’s ruthless.

    • Dani2 says:

      Exactly. She really did all that she could to alienated this man from his kids, I feel sorry for her kids, I have no sympathy for her whatsoever.

    • jwoolman says:

      If he really has moved for full custody, her antics last summer would be the reason. She openly threatened to keep the kids rather than return them to their dad at the end of the summer. The judge was not pleased. When Britney Spears did that, she ended up on a psych hold and was stripped of even visitation rights by the judge (Federline allowed visitation anyway as long as one of her parents was always present and she didn’t drive with them). Granted, Britney was very obviously ill. But 911 was called really because she refused to hand over the kids to the person sent to pick them up to go back to their dad (she also probably scared the bejesus out of Federline in a phone call, though, when she locked herself in a bathroom with the younger one…) Anyway, violating court custody orders is a huge deal. Deliberately trying to alienate children from the other parent is another huge deal, and she seems to do this with wild abandon. I’m surprised that she still is allowed joint custody, she’s on very thin ice.

      If she wants to make a petition, she should ask the Prez to get her ex’s visa back and admit that she didn’t have any basis for the claims made about his activities that caused him to lose it in the first place. He lost the visa because nowadays, just the accusation is enough. No one has ever provided any evidence for her claims.

    • Lucky Charm says:

      She already tried that last summer while they were in the Hamptons.

    • holly hobby says:

      She did last summer. They were here in NY and she filed a habeas corpus petition. She’s full on crazy.

      • paleokifaru says:

        I’m a little shocked he hasn’t petitioned for full custody after that stunt. He’s got boatloads of evidence of her parental alienation.

  4. Crumpet says:

    The sad thing is, if she moves to Europe, she probably won’t be able to support herself to the extent of having a home with enough bedrooms for all the children. The courts will not give her back her children unless she can show she can support them.

    I know, I’ve been there.

    • morc says:

      She said in an interview with some swedish blog (!) that she already sold everything and lives in a 1 bed room apartment.

    • JaneS says:

      And she holidays in the Hamptons. She’s celebrity broke.

  5. Lilacflowers says:

    He hasn’t commented on the case because decent parents or parents with really good lawyers don’t; it isn’t good for the kids or the case.

    And way to waste my tax dollars, Kelly. Somebody in the executive branch is going to have to spend time handling that petition instead of doing something that actually helps people

    • Izzy says:

      Eh, only if the petition gets 100,000 signatures. It would be unfortunate if it did, but that’s a high threshold to reach, and it has to happen in one month. Not as easy as it sounds. I’m not sure the petition to revoke $cientology’s tax-exempt status even made the needed threshold (!).

    • Tooly says:

      Also: not everyone wants to fight things out in the celebrity’s arena: the court of public opinion.

  6. Sam says:

    She really needs to stop. She’s just making herself look terrible at this point.

    Her children were not deported. Her children are free to come back to the US at any time, and customs would not stop them. The relevant issue is that their father cannot come with them (at least as far as we know – he might be able to, but he hasn’t tried).

    If Kelly is really serious about this, then why not try to get the travel restrictions on her ex lifted so that he can accompany the kids back? It was her allegations that caused this whole giant mess in the first place. She has, to my knowledge, never once owned up to lying about her ex engaging in terrorism. Why not be honest, throw yourself on the mercy of the government and say, “I lied to get my ex barred from the US so I could have the children to myself and it backfired on me.” Just be out with it. I’d actually have some respect for her if she could do that. But I think pigs will fly first.

    Also – why hasn’t she just relocated to Monaco? From what I understand, her ex pays all her travel expenses and other things so she can see the kids. Just move. Live off those Gossip Girl residuals and try to make nice with your ex. Shouldn’t a mother want to do anything for her children?

    • Angie says:

      “If Kelly is really serious about this, then why not try to get the travel restrictions on her ex lifted so that he can accompany the kids back? ”

      This is what I think she needs to do as well.

      • Chichi says:

        She already did. Very early on, the court ordered her to provide him with not just a recommendation letter to the State Department but to provide any other assistance deemed necessary. She did do the letter. Its just not clear whether HE has made any effort to apply for review.

      • paranormalgirl says:

        He was told by a California court to reapply for a visa. He has not done so. THAT is on him.

        That being said – no way would I NOT move to be nearer to my children.

      • Andrea says:

        She’d basically have to get a regular job to live near her children, which I am guessing she is unwilling to do. Plus, most Americans cannot fathom living outside of the US(or can’t afford it, but I know she probably can). I moved to Canada from the US and received so many dumb questions from some of my American friends(are you giving up your citizenship? will you have to speak french? will you be able to vote anymore?) Moving to another country much less Europe is a really strange and foreign concept to a lot of Americans.

      • bluhare says:

        I agree, paranormalgirl. He’s been asked to reapply for a visa and he should. It’s tough to be on the high road when there’s potholes in it.

  7. Lola says:

    Wait, hold up, I need help here, why was this case in federal court? By watching plenty of tv I can’t even say this is a bit off. Plus, don’t State courts have the same opportunity to see constitutional questions? She is shopping for a favorable judgment.
    I don’t think the lack of a visa is shady. I had an ex colleague that was dating a guy that got deported, and he had to wait 5 or 7 years in order to re-apply and it was not a sure thing the US would give the visa back.

    • Lilacflowers says:

      Federal court because of the “diversity” of the parties – he’s not a U.S. resident and he can’t come here so that gives federal courts jurisdiction

    • BearcatLawyer says:

      The most recent case in federal court was an attempt to allege that the California state court judge had “deported” her U.S. citizen children in her custody rulings. Kelly’s federal court argument was pretty weak and was almost guaranteed to fail since the children remain U.S. citizens and thus ALWAYS have the right to return to the U.S. Neither the California family court judge nor any U.S. immigration judge issued any orders of removal (aka deportation) against her children, and the children are not legally barred from reentering or living in the U.S. (They are, however, effectively barred from living in the U.S. full-time because Kelly’s attorney got her ex-husband deported from the U.S., but that is not really the issue here.)

      Because immigration law issues are federal law questions and she was alleging that a California state court had deported her children to Monaco, she had to bring her suit in federal district court. The federal judge did the legally correct thing and refused to entertain her claims. The case law in situations like this is well-established: the children were not deported. As long as the children are U.S. citizens and do nothing to affirmatively renounce their citizenship after they are adults, they will always retain their legal rights to live and work in the U.S. as well as to return to the U.S. after any foreign travel.

    • holly hobby says:

      She filed for habeas corpus.

  8. jwoolman says:

    Oh, shut up, Kelly. Your kids have dual citizenship, which includes being citizens if the European Union, so they have rights of citizenship everywhere in the EU. You’re able to fly out to see them frequently at their dad’s expense. They aren’t kidnapped. They aren’t hidden in the deepest jungles somewhere. They aren’t trapped on the moon. Get over it. Move near them for a few years if you’re not happy traveling, and act like every other divorced parent who had to share and accommodate to where the other parent has to live. And Google this place called Europe. I hear it’s quite civilized now. Even has running water and flushable toilets.

    • Cankles says:

      That’s what I really don’t understand about this. Don’t get me wrong, I can’t imagine how heartbreaking it is for her to be away from her kids-but she is acting as though they were sent to live in the 9th circle of Hell or something. France is a beautiful country! (I’ve never been to Monaco, but assume the landscape is similar to the surrounding south of France.) her kids might end up *gasp* learning a language other than English!

  9. Lurker says:

    This is just one of those cases where she hates her ex more than she loves her kids, and she will do anything to “win” the divorce. Sick. Thank God the kids have one normal parent and the law is on his side.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      Agree. Sit down and shut up.

    • Christin says:

      I kept seeing headlines about this situation, but am just learning the details. She sounds overdramatic. Doesn’t sound like her kids are endangered, and she has the means to visit or move closer instead of chewing up money on attorneys.

      • Becks says:

        I believe the husband covers her costs for 6 round-flights every year. Presumably, this was an attempt to be fair as she would cover the other 4 and see her kids every month for 10 months of the year (Ten months because she gets them for the 2 months of summer)

      • Andrea says:

        What’s she complaining about then? yes, the situation sucks, but she should have thought that getting him deported may not be in her favor, sounds like she didn’t even take that into consideration and now has become unhinged when things didn’t go her way.

    • Little Darling says:

      @lurker~ this! Over and over again! I had the same judge in CA, massive hatred for my ex and you know why I did? I GOT OVER IT for the sake of my kids. I loved them more than I wanted revenge, I loved them more than my own feelings, I loved them more than I hated him.

      • paleokifaru says:

        Good for you! It’s shocking to me how few parents seem to be able to act like adults. My husband’s ex makes absolutely every encounter so unpleasant that we have to follow the custody and parenting plan to the letter just to minimize interactions with her. And the thing is it didn’t have to be that way. If she could be remotely civil and sane in her dealings we would have been happy to go to her first if we need childcare for him, etc. But it’s always so awful on everyone that we operate in a totally separate sphere as much as possible. People don’t seem to understand that when you engage in parental alienation all you’re going to do is alienate the kid from you.

    • Lee1 says:

      100% this.

      When I was about 10 years old, my mom remarried and moved to the US with my step-dad. She and my dad went to court over physical custody, which lasted at least all summer from what I recall. Going through that uncertainty was one of the worst things about the whole situation. Yes, it was tough to have parents who divorced, tough to readjust when they each remarried, and tough to be separated by huge distances from one of them at all times, but I just remember spending that summer terrified about what would happen to us and what it meant for the rest of our lives knowing that I had no control over any of it. I can’t even imagine these poor kids having to go through that for YEARS.

      It’s time for Kelly to let it go and spend her money on visiting her kids instead of paying lawyers to file unnecessary suits.

  10. RN says:

    She’s starting to scare me a little bit. Desperate people do dumb things and she’s coming unhinged. If I were her ex, I would worry about her having the kids for the summer; specifically, when it’s time for her to send the kids back.

  11. Chichi says:

    I still contend that it is irrelevant who got his visa revoked at this stage. He should be making sincere efforts to return and for years she has said that he hasnt even applied. With the way court proceedings have consistently leaked in this case not to mention TMZ on the trail, I find it hard to believe that he HAS been working on getting his visa back and we just havent heard. Kelly claimed years ago that the judge was biased because she compelled Kelly to write a character witness letter on his behalf to the State Department but didnt order the father to actually apply which means that he cant be held for contempt of court.

    I also think that judge made a major fail in not requiring them to negotiate a more suitable new country of residence. They may have been able to agree on Canada or Mexico. Its not like the guy returned to his home country of Germany, if we are starting afresh why not a Canadian border city? Somewhere that doesnt require a mother to take a transatlantic flight to see her kid when he breaks his arm or loses a pet or just needs a hug from mum.

    • Lilacflowers says:

      He is absolutely under no obligation to come here or to try to come here. He owes her nothing and has no obligation to do what she wants.

      • Chichi says:

        Actually he is. The ruling that allowed him to remain with the children stated that it was a temporary situation until he could return. The problem is that the judge didnt give him a timeline. He IS required by a court to make good faith efforts to return, it isnt merely to please the mother.

      • Jesmari says:

        Actually he does. He was court ordered to apply for a visa again. He has not done so, and in clear violation of a court order.

    • morc says:

      Because he would need a visa for Canada as well, and seeing how you can’t enter Canada with charges of DUI I would assume it’s impossible to enter Canada, let alone acquire a visa when your US visa has been revoked for (unfounded) allegations of terrorism.

      Why would he not move to Europe? As EU citizens he and his children are free to settle where they want to. It’s not like he chose Romania (which I hear is lovely). He chose one of the countries that are the most accessible for international travelers, France, UK, Spain, Italy, Germany, aka The Big 5 are perfectl reasonable to live in.

      • Chichi says:

        Mere speculation. We dont even know if a closer country was considered let alone if applications were made.

        A competent unbiased judge would have required them to sit down and attempt to reach an arrangement. This judge simply did what people on message boards do, decided Kelly is a b*tch and determined to “teach her a lesson”. She may well be a b*tch but a judge should have been trying to keep the children as close to BOTH parents as possible. If she thought Kelly an unfit parent she should have declared her so and stripped her custody. This judge should have known this ruling, allowing children to move to another continent without first exhausting every other alternative including a country close by would create a permanet rift between the parents and that it wouldnt be beneficial for the kids.

    • jwoolman says:

      All the leaks are coming from Kelly, so of course we won’t hear anything about any actions he is trying to take to reinstate his visa (which is pretty futile, the kids will be grown by the time it winds through the bureaucracy). The dad and his lawyers are not leaking anything, especially to US tabloids like TMZ.

    • morc says:

      Please, the visa process does not work on speculation, don’t be obtuse.

    • The Original Mia says:

      It absolutely does matter who got his visa revoked. She wanted to make it so that he couldn’t live in the US with his children. She didn’t want to parent with him, as evidenced by her refusal to submit a parenting plan or attending classes with him. She decided they were her kids and hers alone long before we got to this point. It was her unwillingness and selfish, myopic behavior that has landed her in the position she’s in.

      • bluhare says:

        I’m beginning to think this way too. She sounds like a classic narcissist who cannot see that her children are not extensions of herself.

      • Chichi says:

        The reason I say it doesnt matter is because the implications worry me. It basically says that a partner who suspects her co-parent of a crime needs to keep her mouth shut lest her kids be shipped off to wherever he lands. Afterall, a family judge doesnt get to test the strength of allegations made. That can only fall to the State Department. She can only run with speculation and GUESS whether the partner had reasonable cause to hold those suspiscions.

        In a court the only consideration ought to be whats in the kids best interest. If a judge feels that a parent will be a negative presense in the kids life she should formally restrict custody. This judge allows the parents 50-50 custody but then allow such a huge distance without monitoring that he is actually complying with her initial order to make efforts to return or atleast trying to move a country closer to their mum. Its pretty obvious the judge ruled to purnish Kelly rather than in the best interests of the kids.

      • paleokifaru says:

        I would imagine she doesn’t think Kelly has the kids best interest at heart and she won’t respect coparenting. Which we’ve seen time and again. And typically in those situations the court will then prefer the parent who will be more likely to play ball and give the other access. Kelly tried to keep his name off the second child’s birth certificate. She had to be ordered to add it. She’s clearly not interested in forming any kind of respectful relationship.

      • Chichi says:


        But thats exactly the problem I have with this judge. She never declared Kelly unfit or formally altered the custody arrangement based on anything Kelly had done. She just declared that the 50-50 custody arrangement would remain in place oh and since the dad cant come over to fulfill his part of that, the kids will live with him. Its a round about way of stripping Kelly custody without actually putting it on paper. Now the judge can just rely on the same line people are blindly posting here “she should move to that country if she wants her proper 50% custody”. That judge was not just spiteful but cowardly to do this.

        What if Mary is married to John a foreign national who she sincerely suspects of breaking a law? This judge I suppose would send the kids over to wherever he is deported? Lets think about this logic for abit. Remember that a family court judge would be in no position to gauge Marys intention in reporting John, she wouldnt even be able to test Marys allegations for truth.

        Also I love the user name, paleokifaru as in paleorhino?

    • VirgiliaCoriolanus says:

      Question: Do we know that he hasn’t reapplied for a visa, or are we just saying he hasn’t because a) his ex is saying that, or b) he hasn’t gotten one yet/he isn’t talking? Because I don’t think he’s commented at all on the custody issue. She’s doing all of the talking to the media.

      • holly hobby says:

        Plus the Dept of State will not comment on any status if he did apply. No one knows so as of now, I’m inclined to believe she’s full of it.

    • Inha says:

      ” I also think that judge made a major fail in not requiring them to negotiate a more suitable new country of residence. They may have been able to agree on Canada or Mexico. Its not like the guy returned to his home country of Germany, if we are starting afresh why not a Canadian border city?”

      @Chichi: He may not be a french citizen but his parents live in Monaco, and he and the kids live with them. He went where he had family.

  12. Giddy says:

    Her ego is out of control if she truly believes this is a political problem for Obama. I have never seen her described as a particularly beloved actress, and it is hard to imagine that there would be enough of reaction to her petition to bring this situation to a level involving diplomats or the White House. This is not a situation where a non-custodial parent has kidnapped children and taken them out of the country. And her statement that she has always wanted her children to have a relationship with their father is absurd; even under court order she refused to put his name on her daughter’s birth certificate. I just hope the children are fine and that she is smart enough to not criticize their father to them.

  13. InvaderTak says:

    So when is the court ordered psych evaluation going to happen? She needs it.

  14. MrsNix says:

    I’m starting to think her kids are better off with their dad. She made this nest, and now she has to perch in it. This is unstable behavior, and it has been creepy-scary behavior from the start. We get it. She doesn’t like the father. Well, she made babies with the man, and they’re his kids, too. She got him kicked out of the country, so now she’s got a fine kettle to sit with and drink from alone.

    She needs to calm down, get some perspective, and reflect on how she got here.

  15. aang says:

    I am still not clear how one gets a visa revoked unless the party being deported is engaged in a crime. If he was breaking the law he should have been deported and the kids should have remained here while going to Europe for the summer. If he lives in Monaco he must be very wealthy and at the very least trying to avoid paying high taxes in Germany, while maybe not illegal, it is distasteful. She is getting all the heat but I bet money and connections are working in his favour.

    • renee28 says:

      Your visa can be revoked for almost anything. In this day and age even an allegation, especially one that involves guns and terrorism, is enough to get your visa revoked. The State Department doesn’t have the time or desire to fully investigate every little claim. It’s just easier to revoke visas and kick people out.

      • claire says:

        But it sounds like in her petition, she’s claiming it was never revoked? She makes no sense.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      Apparently the accusation is enough to get you deported.

    • PoppyAdair says:

      Visas can be revoked or the State Department can refuse to issue a visa merely because they suspect or have reason to believe a person has engaged in criminal or unsavory activities. Formal charges or convictions are not required. All her lawyer had to do was tell the State Department that Daniel Giersch *might* be involved in illegal arms dealing (which could be considered providing material support to terrorists). Plus Daniel Giersch would have had the burden of proof to rebut these allegations; the State Department NEVER has the burden of proof to show the claims are true. It is awfully difficult to prove a negative, especially to the satisfaction of a federal government agency.

    • jwoolman says:

      During the Reagan Administration, I knew a Honduran physician who was denied a US visa to even just stop for refueling a plane while on a flight to Canada for a workshop on his specialty (malnutrition. in children). The US embassy made it clear that it was because he spoke out against the contra bases that the U.S. government had set up illegally (by both US and Honduran law) to attack neighboring Nicaragua with mercenaries. He was outspoken because the bases displaced middle class farmers who then moved to his city, where they were impoverished and their children ended up getting sick and dying in his clinic from common childhood diseases that well nourished children could survive quite nicely. He was a graduate of a US medical school and head of the clinic. Visas were also routinely denied for political reasons to people invited for speaking tours who disagreed with US policy in such matters. The Prime Minister of Canada at the time (Trudeau) had a lot of trouble entering the United States also! Really, it’s very common for quite benign people to be denied visas either for purely political reasons or (in the case under discussion) because it’s easier to deny the visa than to investigate charges made by sketchy people such as an ex in a custody battle or her lawyer. Once denied, it can take years before it can be reinstated even under the best conditions. Entry to a nearby country such as Canada can also be denied if the dreaded word “terrorist” is invoked, no matter how baseless the charge may be.

      So I doubt very much that the guy here can just fill out an application and all will be well. Living in Europe is very likely the best solution, since their dad has family there and it’s a good thing for them to be educated there just for language reasons alone (since they have dual citizenship in the US and the European Union). They can practice their American English and absorb the MacDonald’s culture during the summer. This woman has just never wanted to share, but that’s what you have to do in a divorce. A normal woman would be happy they have a good home with their dad and get to experience both cultures, and would also be happy that she is flexible enough to spend plenty of time with them if she establishes a home near their dad for the next few years. Meanwhile, he’s paying for frequent visits.

      • TotallyBiased says:

        @jwoolman –
        You know both France and Monaco have McDonald’s. Just sayin’ :D

  16. Mia4S says:

    She’s so strange. I always go back to how she abandoned her first husband when he got sick. Didn’t fit her plan I guess?

    My impression is she wanted kids but not a husband (not really). Let this be the lesson. It’s 2015, there are ways to have kids on your own if you choose. But if you have kids with someone they have rights too. Period.

    • Wren33 says:

      This just makes me think again how you really need to carefully consider who you marry and have kids with. Even if you divorce, you are going to be tied to that person forever, and will be limited in where you can move for love/career/preference since nowadays most people have joint custody.

    • Dara says:

      @mia4s, I was going to say exactly that. I remember so vividly how she professed her profound love for the man she married who then became seriously ill only a few months into their marriage. By the time that interview aired she had already filed for divorce.

  17. QQ says:

    She needs to stop it and Stop It at once

    On a More superficial Note Who Knew Kelly Rutherford and Her Kids were officially allowed to wear any other colors than pure ultra pristine Innocent White ?? (eyeroll!)

  18. PoppyAdair says:

    Based on the allegations her attorney allegedly made against him, Daniel Giersch would be an idiot to apply for a new visa. Any *hint* of involvement with terrorist activities is enough to get a person permanently barred from the U.S. It would be a waste of time and money for him to even file the visa application.

    Next, Kelly and her attorneys cannot get any restrictions on Daniel’s ability to apply for a visa. Only the State Department or the Department of Homeland Security can grant him a waiver of any bars to admissibility, and which department processes the waiver application depends on what kind of waiver he would require. But again, there are NO waivers for certain things, like terrorism or drug dealing.

    She needs to sit down, shut up, and deal with the situation as it is and will undoubtedly remain for the foreseeable future. Thousands of U.S. Citizen children are de facto deported from the U.S. every year when their noncitizen parents are forced to leave. Others end up living with relatives, guardians, or in foster care in the U.S. because the parents decide they do not want their children growing up in a foreign country. Custody cases like hers arise all the time too and do not get the same attention hers is receiving, which is due both to her celebrity and her shady immigration claims.

  19. Wooley says:

    Doesn’t she claim to be broke yet lives in the Upper East Side and vacations in the Hamptons while dressed to the 9s in designer clothing?

    • Triple Cardinal says:

      There was a recent blind item–maybe via CDAN–detailing an actress in the Hamptons who attends every possible party and get-together. She does this, she says, because it’s a source of free food.

      Rutherford was listed as a possible answer.

  20. feebee says:

    I think there’s so much more to this story. Layers and layers. Many layers we aren’t entitled to see so we can only speculate. What parts are public just don’t add up. If she purposely lied to authorities to get husband kicked out of country thinking she’d live happily with kids here solo well… that backfired big time.

  21. lucy2 says:

    I’m going to start a petition to make Kelly Rutherford shut the hell up.

    How dare she try to compare her situation with the immigration issue? Her kids are American citizens who are freely sent to spend the summers with her in the US, and her travel expenses are paid to go visit them in Monaco several times a year besides that. She can move to be with them, and come back to the US to work when she gets work. These are LUXURIES compared to what some families go through regarding immigration and deportation.

  22. funcakes says:

    Obama’s checklist

    Meet with heads of nations check

    Updates about the disaster in Napal check

    Updates about riots in Baltimore check

    Updates about the the girls in Africa that were kidnapped a year ago and possibly sold as sexslave. Check

    An actress who has control issues that think the world revolves around her. -First priority

    • Becks says:

      funcakes beat me to it:

      President Obama currently has:
      **a pending nuclear deal with Iran to navigate
      ** an international trade agreement before Congress
      **and growing protests over police abuse following the death of Freddie Gray, 25, while in police custody in Baltimore.

      I really hope she doesn’t reach the requisite 100k signatures which would then oblige the Obama administration to waste their time on her.

    • Tough Cookie says:

      bwahahaha…thank you!!!

  23. Freebunny says:

    Girl, France and Monaco are not Syria or Iraq.
    Take a plane and go to see your children.

  24. roxy750 says:

    Yea, this would be interesting (and sad on both ends) to see how it pans out.

  25. Andrea says:

    My friend told me long time ago be very careful who you have children with and I think this is the case for this story. You get your ex deported did you think you’d get full custody and the children would never see their father again? Silly really. Exactly why Halle Barry didn’t get to move to France.

    • Christin says:

      My father gave me similar advice when I was dating. He said it was one thing to marry and then things not go well, but having children entirely changes the equation. I also had a former boss say that children did not just tie you to the other parent for 18 years, but far beyond that due to weddings, grandchildren, etc.

      • paleokifaru says:

        Oh for sure. My husband is always saying it’s only _____ more years that we have to deal with his crazy ex and I’m always replying with “No. We have to deal with her forever. You just won’t have to make decisions with her on a regular basis anymore.” And let’s face it 18 isn’t what it used to be. I guarantee she’ll disagree with him about every college decision possible and when my poor SS is old enough to be making choices about his holiday time, etc I bet she’ll make that a nightmare too.

      • Jayna says:

        And can turn doubly worse depending upon who the ex marries. It can turn into a nightmare on who they remarry. LeAnn Rimes, anyone?

  26. FUTMZ says:

    Pay your child support, DEADBEAT MOM!!!!!

  27. lisa says:

    Kelly Rutherford seems to lack self awareness. That has already cost her having her children live full time in the US with her if she doesn’t stop it she could very well wind up with zero custody. The stunts she has pulled would have any judge question whether she has the best interest of her children in mind. She is stupidly digging her own grave while her ex has remained silent and let her hang herself. The best thing for her to do at the moment is shut up co parent her children and at the ages of 12 or 13 ask them if they want to spend more time in the US which is the only way I see her getting the custody that she wants.

  28. GoOnGirl says:

    What is she hoping Obama can do?

    • Montréalaise says:

      I guess she’s hoping he will put aside the catastrophe in Nepal, the war in Syria, the crisis in Baltimore and the conflict in Ukraine to devote his energies to helping poor little Kelly.

  29. perplexed says:

    How much money does she have? Is it hard for her to avoid plane tickets until the kids are a little older, and the judge might decide to give her back partial custody?

  30. Hestia says:

    You know, Europe is really quite a nice place! She’s making it sound like anyone being brought up outside of America is practically living in a warzone. I’m not quite sure what disadvantage she thinks her children at at being raised in another country – ifanything it’s to their benefit to be multi-lingual and have a wide range of cultures at their fingertips. If I was being snarky I’d say they’re probably benefitting more than they would living in America and just holidaying in other countries (or never even visiting other countries). But as it’s Friday I won’t!

  31. GoOnGirl says:

    Wasn’t she the one who started this whole thing, by having her lawyers turn the husband in for something or the other which caused him to be deported? Guess she didn’t think this all the way through.

    • FUTMZ says:

      Yes. She should be criminally charged for making false statements to the immigration folks, sued blind for defaming her ex-husband, and her parental rights terminated for child abuse by scheming to keep her kids from their father.

  32. littlestar says:

    Wow, this woman does not give up, does she?

    Also: She seems so unhinged, that it’s probably best the children DON’T live with her fulltime. Could you imagine being raised by a mother like that?

    • VirgiliaCoriolanus says:

      littlestar–just imagine how she’s going to react when he gets a new girlfriend/potential stepmother to those kids? Heads will explode. Next she’ll be accusing HIM of parental alienation via giving the kids a new “mother”.

      I haven’t heard anything about his personal/dating life, so I’m assuming that he’s still scarred from being married to her. It really seems like she wanted her own personal babymaker, and then once she had the kids, she didn’t want him anymore. This custody drama has lasted twice as long, if not more, than how long they were married.

    • paleokifaru says:

      Well so far she’s petitioned the president to intervene in her children’s lives….yeah they’ll turn out totally normal instead of firmly believing they’re special snowflakes who merit the attention of the president. Yeesh.

  33. Anon says:

    Just google female sociopath and using of the children for revenge with the ex…bingo with this woman.

  34. WTF says:

    She exhausts me. Her whining exhausts me. You played dirty, and you lost. Put on your big girl panties and live with it.
    But I guess no one ever lost anything by blaming the president for their problems.

  35. Nikki L. says:

    The level of self-absorption this woman possesses is unbelievable.

  36. BlackBetty says:

    I’m sure Obama has bigger issues to deal with than this.

  37. Miss E says:

    “I’ve always wanted them to have a relationship with their father”…IRC didn’t she refuse to put his name on the birth certificate of their youngest child? WTF!

    • morc says:

      Yep, and by doing so majorly pissing off the judge as he ordered her to do so.

      To add insult to injury he was not informed that his daughter was born, he saw it on TMZ.

  38. alicegrey12 says:

    BOO HOO Whatever

  39. justwastingtime says:

    Parental alienation is serious and has a lasting impact on kids. IT goes a long way back with her, apparently she refused to put her dh’s name on her youngest birth certificate. Given the tricks she has played, I am surprised her ex hasn’t gotten full custody by now, she is probably very close to losing joint.

  40. A.Key says:

    Yeah but why were the children taken from her in the first place???
    Isn’t that the main issue?
    She clearly did not seem fit enough to the court to be a full time parent or they wouldn’t have ruled the kids have to stay with their dad.

    • Jayna says:

      She has half custody. The Court deems her fit to be a parent, just as her ex. But both live in different countries now. When he was deported, to give him access to the children so he could exercise his visitation, she had to fly to Canada and I think Barbados (not sure) on weekends with the kids to see him. I think the kids were on airplanes about, on average, three times a month. The Court didn’t think that was good for the children. The ex couldn’t fly in to the U.S., since his visa was revoked. So the only way for the father to see his children were the children always flying to him often each month. Whereas, if they lived in France, the mother would be the one flying so much, not the children.

      The Court also felt there had been parental alienation on the part of the wife at times towards the ex and that the ex-husband had, on the other hand, showed the willingness to co-parent. The Court felt the children could live in France with him, and that she, with her schedule, could fly to see them. He made the husband responsible for six round-trip airline tickets a year and her lodging and providing a car to her on those visits to see the children. Also, saying he should try to work on getting a visa again when he is eligible to try in two years, and this could possibly be revisited, which the ex-husband hasn’t done.

  41. LAK says:

    She wants to win at all costs. I doubt she truly cares for people whose kids have genuinely been kidnapped and disappeared to countries where they are never seen again.

  42. Chaz says:

    I see a lot of criticism against Kelly but hardly any against the father.
    He is a German, who has specifically moved the children to Monaco, due to laws in his favour.
    Whilst I do believe she tried to manipulate the US system and failed, he is just as guilty of doing so.
    She needs income to fight the legal battles, which is why she probably feels remaining in the US is the better financial decision.
    Meanwhile the children are the pawns in this battle.

    • morc says:

      He is an EU citizen and can set up residence where ever he pleases. Shec can chose, and does so, to live in any US state she choses.

  43. Debbie says:

    Do they pronounce the names ‘Air-mez’ and ‘Elena’? Or ‘Hher-mes’ and ‘Hhelena’?