The US Supreme Court is deciding whether a court appointed divorce lawyer is required for hearings on delinquent child support.
The United States Supreme Court is currently dealing with the extremely difficult legal question of whether poor people should be sentenced to jail during child support proceedings without the benefit of a divorce lawyer. Based upon comments from the Justices themselves, they appear confused and flummoxed about how to rule. This is likely due to the complicated procedural and legal problems with either of the two ways that they can decide.
Justice Kennedy summarized the arguments by claiming that litigants do not always have the right to have the benefit of legal counsel when they are before a court, but that they may have this right to an attorney in certain circumstances. Kennedy went on to say that if the Supreme Court found that litigants did have a right to counsel, this could grind courts across the country to a halt leading their dockets to become congested with the huge number of child support cases that they have each year.
The actual litigant that is appealing to the Supreme Court has a compelling personal case for a divorce lawyer to assist him. He is a man from South Carolina who has been found in contempt of court for not paying child support. He claims that he is too poor to pay what the court has ordered him to pay. The court in South Carolina has put in him jail repeatedly because he has not paid, including stays up to one year. He argues that if an attorney could assist him explain to the court that he is unable to pay what he owes, he will have a greater ability for the court to work with him and find an amicable solution.
Beginning in the 1960s, the Supreme Court has held repeatedly that the indigent facing jail time need to have the opportunity to be provided with an attorney in order to protect their Sixth Amendment rights under the Constitution. The problem with applying the Sixth Amendment right to counsel in this particular case is that this normally only applies to criminal cases, not domestic/civil litigation.
The woman that is owed child support in this case argues that mandating that litigants facing such civil litigation must have the opportunity to be represented would then apply to all sorts of other cases where confinement could be ordered, such as immigration law. The federal government voiced its opinion that the Supreme Court should attempt to split the decision by having the local court judge question the party owing support or have the court have the person fill out a questionnaire providing the court with reasons supporting an inability to pay rather than having a divorce lawyer appointed in every case. Showing the depth of frustration at finding a solution, Justice Kagan found that having a litigant simply fill out form did not seemingly meet her level of the procedural protections of a person facing jail time.
More Louisiana Divorce Lawyer Questions and Answers
If you live in Louisiana and you are trying to get a divorce, there are certain rules which you must observe to effectuate this decision. Louisiana has a few public policy objectives when it comes to divorcing couples; and one of the main ones is to make sure that the couple is very sure about the decision they are about to make.General Topics of Louisiana Divorce Attorney Law
This article is written to add to the general knowledge on Louisiana family law which some of these articles can provide. That said, this is a continuation of articles on “Dos and Don’ts” in family law.Louisiana Community Property and Divorce Attorney Example: Greg and Gina
In Louisiana, property which a person possesses while married can be classified into one of two types: community property or separate property. This article provides an example of this.