By Vivek Sankaran, The Imprint, October 12, 2020
The late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg had many gifts, one of which was using language to convey the harsh impact of the law on those living on the margins. Consider her words in M.L.B. v. S.L.J, in which she authored a majority opinion requiring states to provide parents with free transcripts in termination of parental rights (TPR) appeals.
She described the severity of the sanction as making a parent “forevermore, a stranger to her child.” She outlined the Court’s approach as being “mindful of the gravity of the sanction imposed on [the mother].” And she noted that TPRs involved the “irretrievable destruction of the most fundamental family relationship.”
Her words powerfully captured that judges should exercise restraint before deciding to permanently and irrevocably sever relationships between parents and children. Her view aligns with a foundational constitutional view – that before the government strips any person of fundamental rights, it must demonstrate that its action is the least restrictive means to fulfill a compelling state interest. In other words, it must show that its actions are absolutely necessary and no other option exists.
Comments (0)