Many politicians have been paying increasing attention to no-fault divorce. It began in 1969 when then-Governor Ronald Reagan signed it into law in California. Afterward, states across the country started implementing it. Today, every state in the United States allows for no-fault divorce.
What is No-Fault Divorce?
A no-fault divorce does not require a party to show fault to obtain one. While the exact language can vary slightly by state, to get a divorce, a party must only show irreconcilable differences and no reasonable likelihood of the marriage being saved.
Before the advent of no-fault divorce, irreconcilable differences were not enough for a party to get a divorce. Instead, parties had to show fault to get divorced. Thus, for a party to obtain a divorce, they would need to prove marital misconduct such as adultery, domestic violence, abandonment, mental cruelty, or other grounds.
Without the requirement of fault, many courts would deny divorce to parties. A court could deny a divorce even where parties wanted to part ways and move on with their lives.
What Are The Critiques of No-Fault Divorce Today?
Today, no-fault divorce is a different ballgame. Where both parties want a divorce, almost every court will grant it. The only exception would be circumstances where one party contests that the marriage is irretrievably broken and can show that there is a reasonable likelihood the marriage can be saved. While an onerous burden, this can sometimes be shown where the parties are still engaging in sexual relations.
Many politicians critique no-fault divorce as the culprit for the breakdown of the American Family. For example, Vice President J.D. Vance and Speaker Mike Johnson are seemingly skeptical of no-fault divorce. Senator Josh Hawley has also criticized laws that make divorce easier.
Each state enacts divorce laws, so the federal government cannot seemingly change state divorce laws. It is also unknown whether President Donald Trump would even support such a change when he is twice divorced.
Should No-Fault Divorce Be Abolished?
Nonetheless, many still debate whether no-fault divorce should be abolished. The question is whether the advent of no-fault divorce was good or bad. Many disagree on this topic, and seeing how this debate develops will be interesting.
Those in favor of no-fault divorce would argue that proving fault to get divorced is untenable for various reasons, including:
1.) Most courts are already backed up. Proving fault to get a divorce not only results in parties airing their dirty laundry in court, which is unsavory, but it could also cause a divorce to take longer and cost more if cases are not expeditiously resolved.
2.) Some also argue that if fault is required, it would incentivize somebody who wants a divorce to engage in some form of fault.
3.) Others worry that domestic violence victims may be stuck being married to those who abuse them due to the difficulties in getting a fault-based divorce.
Those who are against no-fault divorce point to the breakdown of the family. They would argue that no-fault divorce has caused many children to grow up in broken homes, that parties should be required to attend counseling and live separately for a more extended period before divorcing, and/or that no-fault divorce should be abolished altogether.
