Zablocki: A Few Comments and Questions

Notice that Zablocki is an Equal Protection case.

And notice that although classifications based upon marital status or non-custodial status are not suspect classifications that trigger strict scrutiny, classifications that touch upon a fundamental right do trigger strict scrutiny. Thus, since marriage is a fundamental right, a law that restricts the right of non-custodial parents to marry must be reviewed under strict scrutiny.

I know that many people don't have much sympathy for "deadbeat dads" whose children are on public assistance. But should restricting their right to marry be used to punish them or as a collection device?

What about "deadbeat moms" whose children are on public assistance?

Suppose a state prohibited custodial parents whose children receive public assistance from marrying? Many people who support laws such as that in Zablocki would be outraged by this second type of law, because it restricts the right of poor women to marry. But didn't the law in Zablocki restrict the right of poor men to marry?

Is this an issue for the Court to decide at the national level? Or for the states to decide at the local level?