A federal lawsuit has been filed, highlighting alleged systemic failures in the judicial system that are said to disproportionately affect indigent parents. On January 12, 2026, Rachael Baker lodged a complaint in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio against several defendants, including Judge Maria Santo.
Rachael Baker, an Ohio resident and indigent parent, claims her constitutional rights were violated under the First and Fourteenth Amendments by various state actors and private parties acting jointly. The lawsuit outlines a series of grievances against Judge Maria Santo, Magistrate Teresa Glover, attorney Mark E. G. Davis (acting as Guardian ad Litem), Clerk of Court Stephanie Epling, and attorneys Andrew Bruce Benchic and Kyle Ramge Phillips from Roof Law Office. These individuals are accused of perpetuating a pattern of unconstitutional conduct that includes denying procedural due process and meaningful access to courts while imposing wealth-based penalties on Baker.
The complaint details how Baker was repeatedly subjected to financial burdens despite her documented indigency. She alleges that she was required to pay court-imposed fees and deposits which effectively conditioned her access to justice on her ability to pay. Furthermore, she describes an incident where a court hearing date was altered without timely notice, causing unnecessary financial strain due to travel expenses. This administrative oversight led to additional logistical challenges for Baker who had already appeared at the scheduled time.
Baker also accuses the defendants of engaging in a civil conspiracy aimed at enforcing these unlawful practices through coordinated actions. She asserts that her objections and evidence were routinely ignored or delayed by the court system, leading to further economic penalties such as contempt proceedings initiated without providing her with legal representation despite her inability to afford one.
Moreover, Baker’s confidential financial information was allegedly disclosed without consent to the Guardian ad Litem who then contacted her directly via email outside formal court orders. This breach of privacy compounded Baker’s distress as she struggled with imposed communication barriers requiring payment for third-party services mandated by court orders.
In response to these grievances, Baker seeks declaratory relief recognizing the violations of her constitutional rights alongside injunctive relief prohibiting future enforcement of such practices against indigent litigants like herself. She also requests monetary compensation for damages incurred due to these violations along with sanctions against those responsible for imposing unlawful fees upon her.
The case is being overseen by Judge Helmick with Magistrate Judge Clay assisting in proceedings under Case ID 3:26-cv-00069-JJH. Rachael Baker is representing herself pro se in this matter.
Source: 326cv00069_Baker_v_Santo_Complaint_Northern_District_Ohio.pdf
