View image | gettyimages.com

On Friday, we heard that Kelly’s Rutherford’s ex husband, Daniel Giersch, had told her that she could not bring their two children back with her for a scheduled visit to the US until she surrendered their passports. Apparently this was part of their custody agreement and Giersch’s side was trying to enforce it following a series of public statements by Rutherford suggesting she would take extreme measures to keep the children with her in the US permanently. As you know, Rutherford’s two children, Hermes, 8, and Helena, 5, have lived with their father in Monaco since 2012 following a judge’s ruling. Rutherford’s appeal in federal court, which claimed that her children have been deported, was overturned last month.

A judge in California, not the judge who issued her custody ruling, has now granted Rutherford temporary sole custody of her children until a follow up hearing is held on June 15. Rutherford has claimed that Giersch has filed to give Monaco jurisdiction over the case, and this ruling asserts that California retains jurisdiction. It is unclear if Giersch will comply with the California order or if Monaco will recognize it. You can read the full ruling here and The Daily Mail has more details. I’ll excerpt some of People Magazine’s report here as they have quotes from Rutherford’s lawyer:

According to a court order filed Friday, the children must return to Los Angeles, and their mother will keep their passports. A hearing at the L.A. Superior Court – where Rutherford, Hermes, Helena and Giersch or his representative are required to be present – is scheduled for June 15.

The news comes after Rutherford told PEOPLE that Giersch would not allow her to see the kids after she arrived in France for her latest trip Thursday unless she gave their U.S. passports to someone his legal team called “a neutral person” but she claimed was one of his attorneys.

“We are ecstatic, and hopeful that Monaco will respect the California court’s ruling and send the children home. It has long been our position that Monaco has no jurisdiction because Hermes and Helena, as American citizens, have an absolute right to live in their own country,” Rutherford’s lawyer Wendy Murphy tells PEOPLE. “If the citizenship shoe were on the other foot and these children were citizens of Monaco, I have no doubt the United States would respect their right to reside in Monaco.

“Monaco officials know that sending the children back to America is the right thing to do. I’m looking forward to the happy reunion of the children not only with their mother, but also with their country!”

[From People Magazine]

I read the court’s ruling and they state that “The United States of America remains each child’s habitual residence for purposes of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of Child Abduction… neither parent has the authority to change either child’s residence for Hague Abduction Convention or for any other purposes without written consent of the other parent, which consent has not been provided by either parent… each child’s habitual residence remains the United States.” From what I understand, the Hague Convention only applies when a child is removed in breach of a custody order, and since Giersch had a custody order allowing him to take the children to Europe, I don’t understand how the Hague Convention is applicable. Also, legal experts do not agree on the terms which constitute a child’s “legal residence.” Giersch can argue that they’re also EU citizens and have lived with him for three years. He can also continue to work to have Monaco take over the case.

In any case, the children will most likely be visiting their mother this summer as planned, but it sounds like this custody battle is far from over.

View image | gettyimages.com

View image | gettyimages.com

View image | gettyimages.com