The children were removed because of the visible, obvious evidence that under age girls were being impregnated by men who could only have sex with them by rape.
LOL You are such a degenerate reprobate it isn't funny. If they had any evidence like that at the time then they could have kept the women and children.
Now that they apparently think that they have some evidence that the men raped children why aren't you calling for the State to remove the women and children like they did before? Do you know how to spell hypocrite?
Call names, accuse others of the things you’re doing. It is true that the visible, obvious evidence was that under age girls were being impregnated by men who could only have sex with them by rape.
The 3rd Court of Appeals decreed that that the other children were in no imminent physical danger - it appears that the men only rape girls past puberty when their prophet tells them to.
The SC did rule that the judge could set conditions for their return to their mothers. Before the children could be returned, one girl was legally separated from her abuser and other girls and their babies were identified and their ages were determined. Indictments and arrests followed as the Grand Jury was able.