Idaho Supreme Court won’t weigh legality of child marriage

U.S. Law Review

A legal loophole in Idaho that allows parents of teens to nullify child custody agreements by arranging child marriages will remain in effect, under a ruling from the state Supreme Court on Tuesday.

In a split decision, the high court declined to decide whether Idaho’s child marriage law — which allows 16- and 17-year-olds to marry if one parent agrees to the union — is unconstitutional. Instead, the justices said that once a child is emancipated by marriage, the family court loses jurisdiction over custody matters.

The case arose from a custody battle between a Boise woman and her ex-husband, who planned to move to Florida and wanted to take their 16-year-old daughter along. The ex-husband was accused of setting up a “sham marriage” between his daughter and another teen as a way to end the custody fight.

It’s not a rare scenario — all but seven states allow minors below the age of 18 to marry, according to Unchained At Last, an organization that opposes child marriage. Nevada, Idaho, Arkansas and Kentucky have the highest rates of child marriage per capita, according to the organization. Although minors are generally considered legally emancipated once they are married, they generally still have limited legal rights and so may be unable to file for divorce or seek a protective order.

Erin Carver and William Hornish divorced in 2012, and only their youngest was still living at home last year when both sides began disputing the custody arrangements.

Carver said she learned Hornish was planning a “sham marriage” for the teen to end the custody battle, and asked the family court magistrate to stop the marriage plans. Several days later, the magistrate judge agreed, but it was too late. The teen had already married.

The high court heard arguments in March, and Carver’s attorney contended that the child marriage law is unconstitutional because it allows one parent to terminate another parent’s rights without due process. Hornish’s attorney, Geoffrey Goss, countered that his client had acted legally and followed state law.

In Tuesday’s ruling, a majority of the Supreme Court justices said that because the marriage had occurred before an initial ruling was made, the family court lost jurisdiction. Once a child is married, they are emancipated and no longer subject to child custody arrangements, the high court said.

Related listings

  • Judge gauges if Indiana abortion ban defies religious rights

    Judge gauges if Indiana abortion ban defies religious rights

    U.S. Law Review 10/15/2022

    A top Indiana lawyer on Friday questioned the validity of a lawsuit brought by a group of residents who argue that the state’s abortion ban violates their religious freedoms.A judge heard arguments Friday for about an hour in an Indianapolis co...

  • Mississippi seeks to derail federal suits over mental health

    Mississippi seeks to derail federal suits over mental health

    U.S. Law Review 10/08/2022

    The U.S. Justice Department overreached in suing Mississippi over its mental health system, the state’s solicitor general has argued to a federal appeals court.A Justice Department attorney countered that there’s ample precedent to show t...

  • Bench trial for a man accused of killing 2 women in Phoenix

    Bench trial for a man accused of killing 2 women in Phoenix

    U.S. Law Review 10/02/2022

    A bench trial is scheduled to begin Monday for a man accused of sexually attacking and fatally stabbing two young women in separate killings nearly 30 years ago near a metro Phoenix canal system.Bryan Patrick Miller, 49, is charged with two counts ea...

Experienced Business Law Attorneys - Business Law Attorneys in Chicago, Illinois

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced today that it is clarifying policy guidance (PDF, 71 KB) on the specific work activities its officers should consider when determining whether an individual qualifies for TN nonimmigrant status as an economist.

Companies of all sizes have to deal with a lot of bureaucracy and paperwork just to do business. Long gone are the days of simply designing and manufacturing a great product and putting it out there. It can be incredibly overwhelming trying to do business without making yourself vulnerable to a lawsuit.

If you need to craft an agreement between you and investors or business partners, it is prudent to have it reviewed by a business attorney before you sign anything. You may also want to have your vendor contracts, office leases, sales agreements, and other types of agreements looked over as well. From start-ups to established corporations, the Chicago business attorneys at the Roth Law Group have the know-how to help businesses keep legal trouble at bay.

The attorneys at the Roth Law Group have helped their clients at every stage of the business creation and operation process. From registering as a legally-recognized business entity to hiring employees and then copywriting or trademarking a product idea, the right guidance in the beginning can keep you out of trouble later on.