Governor Rick Scott Being Told to Veto the Equal Parenting and Alimony Reform Bill in Florida
Governor Rick Scott of Florida has 14 days to decide whether or not he will sign a bill that includes an equal parenting presumption and alimony reform. Special interest organizations and domestic relations law firms are actively lobbying against the bill because of the equal parenting presumption.
Equal parenting presumptions are not merely legislative policy preferences—they are constitutionally mandated by the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. Any state statutory scheme that authorizes a domestic relations judge to reduce a fit parent's custodial time without prior adjudication of unfitness under strict scrutiny violates fundamental constitutional law.
The Historical Shift: From Tender Years to Discretionary Bias
Legal HistoryAside from this being portrayed in the media as a battle of the genders—which is really just a smokescreen that the courts have used to their advantage—this is fundamentally an issue of equal protection under the laws.
A little background helps explain how family law arrived at this impasse:
1. Common Law Paternal Preference: Initially, fathers had legal custody rights under English common law because women were legally barred from owning property or working independently under coverture doctrine.
2. The Tender Years Doctrine: Courts of equity subsequently created the non-statutory "tender years presumption," defaulting young children exclusively to mothers.
3. The Best Interest Standard: When women secured full constitutional equality, the workplace, and economic independence, the gender-biased tender years doctrine was struck down as unconstitutional. Family courts replaced it with the nebulous "best interest of the child" standard—which simply allowed judges to replace overt statutory bias with unfettered personal bias.
Today, while statutes no longer explicitly favor one gender, the lack of an equal starting point allows individual judges to rule according to subjective biases, personal ideologies, and Title IV-D financial incentives. Equal parenting bills like Florida Senate Bill 668 directly target and curtail this unchecked judicial discretion.
Constitutional Necessity: Equal Starting Position for Fit Parents
Strict ScrutinyAs Ron and Sherry Palmer of Fix Family Courts assert, an equal parenting presumption is not just good public policy—it is constitutionally required. Any state statute that authorizes a trial judge to start a custody proceeding with anything less than equal rights between two fit parents is unconstitutional on its face.
The Due Process Rule of Law:
The state must begin with equal constitutional rights for both parents. The court cannot infringe, burden, or reduce either parent's time or legal decision-making authority unless the state meets strict scrutiny—requiring clear, convincing, and sworn evidence of imminent harm to the child.
The Palmers submitted formal constitutional notice to all 180 members of the Texas Legislature and forwarded a copy to Florida Governor Rick Scott, demonstrating that parental equality is a fundamental civil right protected under the United States Constitution.
Florida Senate Bill 668: The Grassroots Reform Effort
Legislative ActionDuring the debate over Senate Bill 668, coalition organizations representing domestic relations litigation firms and special interest lobbies rallied in Tallahassee to oppose equal parenting, lobbying Governor Scott to veto the bill.
Advocates across Florida, including Thomas Fidler and parental rights organizations, rallied in peaceful support of the bill at the Florida State Capitol, defending a child's fundamental right to the equal love, care, and guidance of both fit parents.
Strategic Reform Conclusion:
While grassroots lobbying raises awareness, family court judges will continue exploiting statutory loopholes until parents enforce their constitutional rights directly in pleadings, objecting on the record to any unequal custody orders entered without a formal finding of unfitness under strict scrutiny.
Legal Education & Training Notice: Fix Family Courts provides constitutional law education, parental rights training materials, and strategic consulting. Ron B. Palmer and Sherry Palmer are not licensed attorneys and do not provide legal representation. If you are facing child custody litigation, consult with a qualified attorney to formally integrate constitutional objections into your court pleadings.
Related Educational Guides & Authorities
Continue exploring constitutional principles, case law precedents, and procedural strategies.
Family Law Reform Resources, Case Law & Due Process Guide
Fix Family Courts explains that parental rights are fundamental constitutional liberties protected by the Four...
Parental Rights Amendment 2025
Learn how fit parents protect fundamental parental rights in custody hearings. Assert Fourteenth Amendment due...
your Parental Rights are NOT Dependent on Your State's Legislature
Learn how fit parents protect fundamental parental rights in custody hearings. Assert Fourteenth Amendment due...