| 翻訳と辞書 |
| M.L.B. v. S.L.J. ： ウィキペディア英語版 |
M.L.B. v. S.L.J.
''M.L.B. v. S.L.J.'', , was a United States Supreme Court case regarding a controversy over the Fourteenth Amendment. The petitioner, M.L.B., argued that the Mississippi Chancery Courts could not terminate her parental rights on the basis that she was unable to pay the court fees. M.L.B. had been sued by S.L.J. to terminate M.L.B.'s parental rights and gain the ability to adopt the children. The judge declared in favor of S.L.J. under the premise that the decree was fair as it was based on the fulfilling of the burden of proof by the father's and his second wife through "clear and convincing evidence."〔Despite this statement, the Court never elaborated on this evidence or clearly explained why M.L.B.'s parental rights had been dismissed. When M.L.B. went to appeal, she was unable to pay for the record preparation fees of $2,352.36 and was denied. She then went to appeal under ''in forma pauperis'' but was again denied on the grounds that ''in forma pauperis'' is demanded only in criminal, not civil, cases. The case was then brought to the United States Supreme Court, where M.L.B. held that an inability to pay court fees should not be decisive of something as precious as parental rights. She used the guidelines set out in the due process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to fight her case. The Supreme Court decided in the petitioner's favor and stated that in matters regarding parental rights, a court may not stop a party from appealing the case based on financial means.
Because this ruling extended ''in forma pauperis'' to civil cases, there was a question of how liberally it could be applied. It was then clarified that ''in forma pauperis'' may be applied to civil cases only if state controls or intrusions on family relationships are involved.〔(【引用サイトリンク】url=http://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/constitutional-law/constitutional-law-keyed-to-chemerinsky/equal-protection/m-l-b-v-s-l-j-2/2/ )〕 The Supreme Court decided to rule this way, as the family unit is considered so fundamental that its liberty interests should be protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. If these appellate rights were not protected, it was considered to be just as devastating as if a criminal's appellate rights were not considered.
==Background==
抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』
■ウィキペディアで「M.L.B. v. S.L.J.」の詳細全文を読む
スポンサード リンク
| 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース |
Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.
|
|