On August 13th I posted this entry about grandparents' rights in Illinois, which also reviewed some earlier entries.
This week the California Supreme Court ruled on the issue, as reported in this story at Law.com. Some quotes:
Grandparents have the right to visit their grandchildren, the California Supreme Court ruled Monday, but only if they can overcome parents' objections.An AP story reports:The 4-3 ruling, considered mostly favorable to grandparents, also held that courts could award visitation over a custodial parent's objection as long as the non-custodial parent supports it.
The decision drew dissents from three justices, who felt the majority went too far in impinging on parents' child-rearing rights, which Justice Ming Chin called "possibly the oldest fundamental liberty interest the high court has recognized and ... among the most basic of civil rights."
"Both the federal and state constitutions establish the right of custodial parents to decide with whom their children will associate," Chin wrote in a concurring and dissenting opinion. "Obviously, court-ordered visitation over a custodial parent's objection infringes on that right."
Monday's decision is one of a hodgepodge of conflicting rulings from high courts nationwide, with some favoring the grandparents and noncustodial parents and others siding with the sole custodial parent. The cases were prompted after a 2000 U.S. Supreme Court decision that nullified a Washington state statute that had allowed "any person" to petition for court-ordered visitation rights as long as a court found it in a child's best interest.The 64-page decision, Butler v. Harris, is available here. Posted by Marcia Oddi at August 27, 2004 09:58 AMThe dispute before California's justices concerned a woman who has sole custody of a child, but does not want her former spouse's parents to have court-ordered visitation rights to the child. The father, who lost custody and visitation rights in a divorce battle, wants his parents to have visitation.
Four justices of the Supreme Court ruled that a sole custodial parent - the mother in this case - cannot automatically overrule the wishes of the noncustodial father who wants his parents to have visitation rights with his child. Some of the other seven justices said it was an invasion of privacy for the courts to dictate what the sole custodial parent should do.