Matches in DBpedia 2014 for { ?s ?p M.L.B. v. S.L.J., 519 U.S. 102 (1996), 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." 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.. }
Showing items 1 to 1 of
1
with 100 items per page.
- M.L.B._v._S.L.J. abstract "M.L.B. v. S.L.J., 519 U.S. 102 (1996), 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." 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.".