Amidst political shifts, women are being advised to act swiftly with their divorce filings.
Advocates are encouraging prompt action on divorces fearing potential changes to no-fault divorce laws with the incoming U.S. administration, Mail Online reported.
No-fault divorce, a legal relief that has existed for over half a century, allows couples to separate amicably without assigning blame. This system has particularly supported those in unsound marriages, including victims of domestic abuse, by simplifying the divorce process and reducing court burdens across all U.S. states.
Recently, advocacy groups have intensified their efforts to encourage women to expedite divorce procedures. This reaction follows comments made by JD Vance, the Vice President-elect, who has publicly criticized the current no-fault divorce system and advocated for its reform.
Donald Trump, soon returning as President and twice-divorced himself, has not presented any plan to reform national divorce policies. However, his alignment with Vance and Vance's views on no-fault divorce has alarmed advocates and legal experts alike.
According to several family attorneys, there has been a significant uptick in women seeking divorce counsel. Lawyers attribute this rise to the concerns over potential legislative shifts affecting no-fault divorce.
Christian F. Nunes, president of the National Organization for Women, has expressed grave concerns about the incoming administration possibly doing away with no-fault divorce. He noted that this would be a severe setback for women's rights and a move towards a more misogynistic legislative agenda.
Advocates highlight the broader implications of amending divorce laws. Nunes pointed out the potential repercussions such changes could hold for LGBT rights as well, indicating that altering divorce laws could indirectly impact gay marriage by framing marriage strictly as a union between a man and a woman.
Despite the advocacy for stricter divorce laws by groups like the Coalition for Divorce Reform, their efforts have faced significant resistance, even in conservative states. Beverly Willett, a member of the coalition, has acknowledged the challenges in altering the established divorce law.
National leaders, including the President, generally lack the direct authority to alter state-controlled divorce laws. However, the sentiments expressed by federal figures can significantly influence state legislation and public opinion, setting a precedent for future legal interpretations and reforms.
In states like Oklahoma and South Carolina, Republican lawmakers have already pushed forward bills aiming to tighten the grounds for no-fault divorces, suggesting a future where these laws might be increasingly contested at the state level.
No-fault divorce was fundamentally designed to minimize animosity and legal wrangling in divorce proceedings. Before its establishment, spouses had to prove significant wrongdoing like adultery or abuse to legally end their marriage. Such conditions often led to protracted and hostile legal battles, exacerbating an already difficult situation for families.
In contrast, no-fault divorce enabled couples to dissolve their marriage by mutual consent, acknowledging that sometimes relationships irretrievably break down without egregious fault on either side.
The overturning of the constitutional right to abortion by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022 has reinforced anxieties regarding the preservation of no-fault divorce—prompting activists and concerned citizens alike to speculate about the potential rollback of personal freedoms.
As legal professionals, advocates, and lawmakers continue to navigate this contentious arena, the outcome of these debates will likely have far-reaching consequences for the accessibility and nature of divorce in America.
Linda Duba, a vocal supporter of no-fault divorces, emphasized the importance of remaining vigilant. "When you choose to be silent, you allow for this to creep in," she stated, stressing the necessity of proactive engagement in legislative processes to safeguard personal rights and freedoms.
