However interesting these issues may be, this is not the right case for resolving these difficult questions. We respectfully suggest that the proper resolution of this case is found in the time-honored principles of procedural due process. This approach fully protects both the rights of the parents and the original intent of the Constitution. These are procedural rights of parents which cannot be constitutionally ignored. The Due Process Clause prohibits court removal of one's property without a predicate finding that a claimant is entitled to the possession of the goods.
Due process prohibits criminal sentencing unless there has been a prior determination of guilt.
Due process requires finding of parental unfitness prior to the loss of custody of one's child. So too, due process requires a finding of parental fault as a predicate to the invocation of a court's jurisdiction to assign visitation rights to some third party. This procedural right of parents was fixed in history at the time of the adoption of the 14 th Amendment. Accordingly, this understanding of the Due Process Clause is fully consistent with the original intent of the Constitution. 3 Id. at 87 Wash.