Palmore v. Sidoti – Child Custody – Multiracial Household
Palmore v. Sidoti, 466 U.S. 429, 104 S.Ct. 1879, 80 L.Ed.2d 421 (1984).
NATURE OF THE CASE: This family law case involved an appeal to determine if a child custody decree based on the race of the parents was valid under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
FACTS: Sidoti (plaintiff, respondent) sued to regain custody of his three year old daughter after Palmore (defendant, petitioner) was awarded custody incident to divorce. The father sought revocation of the custody decree because Palmore’s second husband was black whereas she and the child were Caucasian. The trial court found the child’s welfare and physical environment in the biracial home to be adequate and the mother’s parenting qualifications to be sufficient. However, Sidoti alleged that the social stigma of being reared in a biracial home would prevent the child from excelling in society because of racism. The trial court held in favor of Sidoti, the ruling was affirmed on appeal, and the U.S. Supreme Court granted cert.
ISSUE: Can the best interest of the child standard in resolving child custody disputes include race as a factor without violating the due process prohibition against racial classifications in government regulation?
RULE OF LAW: No. The best interest of the child standard in resolving child custody disputes cannot include race as a factor without violating the due process prohibition against racial classifications in government regulation.
HOLDING AND DECISION (Burger): The Court will always strike down a state activity under the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause if it infringes the rights of racial group recognized as a constitutional suspect class by the Fifth Amendment unless the state can show that the statute is rationally related to a legitimate end of government. When the state classification is based on race, the state legislation is not entitled to the usual rebuttable presumption of validity.
A parent’s right should not be undercut by racial prejudice. A State’s interests in protecting the welfare of a child do not include the right to manufacture custody arrangements based on race. Race does not evidence the parenting qualifications of either parent.
DISPOSITION: Reversed.