Legal Reference and Example of Precedence in U.S. Federal Kidnapping Case Involving Minors

Hi, I'm looking for references, case laws and precedence in US federal law in regards to the case out lined below, as well as proof that this is not considered kidnapping. Please see attachment "Aron Rosner Complaint" and "Helbrans Rosner Complaint" for the nature for the nature of charges. For examples of cases that can be used for project I attached two case laws. Macklin and Chatwin Based on numerous case laws that I've reviewed it seems there is no basis for the charges, due to the following: All actions were with consent and direct request from the minors themselves. Was a rescue operation from severe physical and psychological abuse at foster home, under 24 hour lockdown with no access to a phone or legal counsel, and deprived of kosher food, and mentally tortured by agressive. All actions were solely for benefit of minors. Perpetrators had no personal motivation or benefit or intent for such. Children escaped from foster home and entered car by own will. Children were and free to go at all times with access to phone. Charge should be International Parental Kidnapping rather than simple kidnapping, and in compliance with the Hague Convention. When encountered with law enforcement in USA and Mexico, minors always insisted to return and to be only with the ones arrested. No force or intent for such. No violence or intent for such. Father requested to assist the children in whatever they request. Legal custody for mother was never enforced. Mother kidnapped children from habitual residence (Guatemala) to USA, therefore jurisdiction for family court should be habitual residence which is Guatemala, additionally father's denial of custody is contrary to the Hague convention. Children were simply being returned to their rightful guardian. ACS lied to father in their office on whereabouts of children, meanwhile court was held ex-parte and ACS lied to court that father is in prison (while father was in their office). Custody order was only temporary - not final. Custody order was never enforced - minors placed in foster home outside jursidiction of court not in mothers custody as ordered. Rabbi Nachman is family member (Uncle) and acted in the best intrest of the children within this parental conflict.