Legal Opinion · Dissent

South Carolina Department of Social Services v. Sarah W.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided March 20, 2013No. Appellate Case No. 2012-208546; No. 27235Published

1DissentJustice Beatty

I respectfully dissent as I believe section 63-7-2570(8)17 is facially unconstitutional to the extent it is used as the sole basis for TPR. In my view, section 63-7-2570(8) is unconstitutional as it impermissibly creates a presumption of parental unfitness due solely to the length of ’time a child spends in foster care. In order to comport with the guarantees of substantive due process, a determination of parental unfitness is a condition precedent to termination of a parent’s fundamental right to the custody of his or her child. As will be discussed, I agree with the decision of the Court of…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Santosky v. KramerSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. Troxel v. GranvilleSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  3. Washington v. GlucksbergSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  4. Reno v. FloresSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  5. Smith v. Organization of Foster Families for Equality & ReformSupreme Court of the United States · 1977

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API