Grandparent visitation rights petition to be considered 2/17 by Supreme Court

The question on which is based the petition, to be considered before the Supreme Court on February 17, 2012 (as E.R.G. v. E. G. H., stems from a decision by the Alabama Supreme Court:

Whether, under the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause, grandparents who seek court-ordered visitation with their grandchildren over the parents' objection invariably must prove that some "compelling" circumstance -- such as parental unfitness or prevention of actual harm to the children -- necessitates visitation, or whether, instead, constitutional requirements are satisfied where the court considering the visitation request applies a "presumption" in favor of the parents' wishes and imposes on the petitioning grandparents the burden of proving that visitation is in the children's best interest.

 The Alabama Supreme Court held that the state's grandparent-visitation statute (as it existed prior to an 2011 amendment) was unconstitutional..."because [it] authorized a court to award visitation to a grandparent whenever doing so 'is in the best interests of the minor child,' potentially overriding a parent's deicision to deny the grandparent such visitation, without regard for the fundamental right of a fit parent to direct the upbringing of his or her child."

The attorneys on the side of the parents are petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court, asking it to consider to hear arguments on this question:

Does the Due Process Clause protect the right of fit, married, natural parents to determine whether their children should have visitation with the children's grandparents?

California's visitation statute, section 3104 of the California Family Code, was ruled on August 23, 2004, in In re Marriage of Harris; the California Supreme Court held that the state's grandparent visitation statute, "did not violate a parent's fundamental right to direct the upbringing of her child." Section 3104 allows courts to grant visitation rights to the grandparent of a minor child, even over the objection of the child's custodial parent, if: (1)the grandparent and child share a preexisting relationship "that has engendered a bond such that visitation is in the best interest of the child," and (2) the court balances the child's interest in visitation against the parent's right to exercise ...parental authority.If both the custodial parent and the other natural or adoptive parent agree that the grandparent(s) should not be allowed visitation, this is considered a "rebuttable presumption" that would allow the court to rule in favor of the parent(s).

Do fit, natural parents who are not married fall under the equal protection due process clause of the 14th Amendment?  (Note the phrasing of the question, above, as posed by the Alabama counsel for the parents.)

Comments

[Karen A. Wyle]

I believe that what will occur on February 17th is the announcement of whether the U.S. Supreme Court will hear this case.

[Wendy Lestina]

Karen, you are correct. Our mistake. February 17 is the date the petition will be considered the Court.