INTERNATIONAL TRAVEL: PRIVILEGE OR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT?
X. CHILD SUPPORT ISSUES
The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA), codified as 42 USC 652(k), established restrictions to freedom of movement as a form of punishment for child support debtors. Though this is an adequate enforcement mechanism for people who have sole American citizenship and own a single U.S. passport, it is inadequate for people who have more than one citizenship and passport.
In Weinstein v. Albright, the Plaintiff applied for a new United States passport. Soon after, he received a letter from the United States Department of State indicating that his application for a passport was denied and that his previously issued passport had been canceled because he had been certified by New York State as being more than $5,000 arrears on his child support (meaning the passport application or renewal for a passport may be denied if a person owes more than $2500 in past due support, or arrears). If a passport application is identified as having child support arrearages meeting the threshold, federal law requires that the individual's passport be denied, revoked, restricted, or limited. This court has considered all of the arguments raised by the parties and undertaken an intensive examination of the complex statutory and regulatory system challenged in this case. For the foregoing reasons, the Court held that the statutory and regulatory scheme for denying passport applications and revoking existing passports for those certified as being more than $5,000 in child support arrears comports with due process and equal protection.
Another case, Eunique v. Powell, raised similar concerns regarding international travel and custodial obligations for the Court. When Plaintiff Eunique’s marriage was dissolved, her husband was awarded custody of the children, and she was ordered to pay child support. She failed to pay the ordered amounts, and by 1998 she was in arrears of over $20,000. After that, the arrearage continued to grow. Although she was unable or unwilling to pay her child support obligations, she desired to travel internationally for business and pleasure, including visiting her sister in Mexico.
Eunique argued that there was an insufficient connection between her breach of the duty to pay for the support of her children and the government's interference with her right to international travel. Eunique asserted that she had the constitutional right to travel abroad, which is so fundamental that it can only be restricted for the most important reasons and by a narrowly tailored statute.
There can be no doubt that the failure of parents to support their children is recognized by our society as a serious offense against morals and the welfare of their children. It violates important social duties and is subversive of good order. See Braunfeld v. Brown . The economic problems caused by parents who fail to support their children are well-known and widespread and can be exacerbated when the non-paying parent is out of the country.
International travel presents further difficulty because the United States cannot easily reach debtors once they have left the country. Unsupported children must often look to the public fiscs for financial sustenance. This demonstrates a rational justification for denying certain people the ability to travel abroad. It is necessary to ensure that those who do not pay their child support obligations remain within the country where they can be easily reached. A person who fails to pay child support may attempt to escape the toils of the law by going abroad. Even if a parent truly wishes to partake of the joys and benefits of international travel, he or she should still prioritize how to support their own children and other familial duties.
Supporting our own children is a basic civic and moral responsibility that must take precedence over international travel plans. It is because of this that the government can refuse to grant any citizen a passport if this citizen remains in substantial arrears on her child support obligations. However, these rules do not work properly when parents have non-U.S. citizenship. These people can freely leave the country using a foreign passport if they do not care about returning to the United States.