The Child Support Debt Bubble

This Article examines the widespread phenomenon of exorbitant child support debt owed by noncustodial fathers in no- and low-income and predominately Black families. Drawing from qualitative data—including a court-based ethnography and in-depth interviews with lawyers, litigants, and judges—this Article explores the inflated and arbitrary nature of the debt, detailing how states utilize family law rules, child support system practices, and court processes to construct burdensome child support arrears that many poor noncustodial fathers will never have the means to pay off. It concludes by arguing that inflated child support arrears should be questioned and challenged

Asymmetry of Representation in Poor People’s Courts

This Essay examines the asymmetry of representation in poor people’s courts, specifically in child support enforcement cases involving the State. The asymmetry of representation is a common occurrence in various civil law fields, but it is notably prominent in family law, which has the highest number of unrepresented parties. As one of the authors has previously explained, we use “poor people’s courts” to refer to state civil courts that hear family, housing, administrative, and consumer cases. These courts present severe challenges to the civil justice system because they are characterized by a substantial volume of cases, socioeconomically disadvantaged litigants, and an absence or asymmetry of representation. Of increasing concern are the problematic outcomes in poor people’s courts; the pro se, low-income litigants in these cases typically lose out to the creditors, landlords, and municipalities that they come up against. This asymmetry in representation also presents a challenge for government attorneys who have to negotiate with these litigants on a daily basis

Racial Capitalism in the Civil Courts

This Essay explores how civil courts function as sites of racial capitalism. The racial capitalism conceptual framework posits that capitalism requires racial inequality and relies on racialized systems of expropriation to produce capital. While often associated with traditional economic systems, racial capitalism applies equally to nonmarket settings, including civil courts.The lens of racial capitalism enriches access to justice scholarship by explaining how and why state civil courts subordinate racialized groups and individuals. Civil cases are often framed as voluntary disputes among private parties, yet many racially and economically marginalized litigants enter the civil legal system involuntarily, and the state plays a central role in their subordination through its judicial arm. A major function of the civil courts is to transfer assets from these individual defendants to corporations or the state itself. The courts accomplish this through racialized devaluation, commodification, extraction, and dispossession.Using consumer debt collection as a case study, we illustrate how civil court practices facilitate and enforce racial capitalism. Courts forgo procedural requirements in favor of speedy proceedings and default judgments, even when fraudulent practices are at play. The debt spiral example, along with others from eviction and child support cases, highlights how civil courts normalize, legitimize, and perpetuate the extraction of resources from poor, predominately Black communities and support the accumulation of white wealth

Racial Capitalism in the Civil Courts

This Essay explores how civil courts function as sites of racial capitalism. The racial capitalism conceptual framework posits that capitalism requires racial inequality and relies on racialized systems of expropriation to produce capital. While often associated with traditional economic systems, racial capitalism applies equally to nonmarket settings, including civil courts. The lens of racial capitalism enriches access to justice scholarship by explaining how and why state civil courts subordinate racialized groups and individuals. Civil cases are often framed as voluntary disputes among private parties, yet many racially and economically marginalized litigants enter the civil legal system involuntarily, and the state plays a central role in their subordination through its judicial arm. A major function of the civil courts is to transfer assets from these individual defendants to corporations or the state itself. The courts accomplish this through racialized devaluation, commodification, extraction, and dispossession. Using consumer debt collection as a case study, we illustrate how civil court practices facilitate and enforce racial capitalism. Courts forgo procedural requirements in favor of speedy proceedings and default judgments, even when fraudulent practices are at play. The debt spiral example, along with others from eviction and child support cases, highlights how civil courts normalize, legitimize, and perpetuate the extraction of resources from poor, predominately Black communities and support the accumulation of white wealth

Complex Kinship Networks in Fragile Families

This Article examines the complex kinship networks in families that experience multiple-partner fertility. Part I begins with a broad examination of the dramatic changes to the American family that have occurred over the past half century. Part I then highlights the broad diversity of forms present in today’s families, the evolving nature of American families, and how a two-tiered family system has emerged as patterns have diverged along class-based lines. Next, Part II turns to multiple-partner fertility, assessing what we know and do not know about this social phenomenon, including its prevalence, characteristics, and trends. Part III then addresses the implications of multiple-partner fertility for family law and policy. It also examines and critiques how the legal system treats family complexity in both the benefits and child support arenas. In concluding, Part III looks to the future; it presents ideas for ensuring that justice guides future policy developments in this area