Honestly, I have a bit of a problem with this from a constitutional perspective. I believe that this does raise serious due process questions. I cannot embrace this differentiation between the rights of custodial vs. non-custodial parents. The U.S. Supreme Court, in the Newdow decision, wielded such an artificial distinction to deny the non-custodial parent from presenting his case — a case that he had previously prevailed upon in the lower courts.
Yes, I do understand the need to safeguard the children. However, when did the primary, custodial parent bear so many more rights and privileges than the non-custodial one?
Read on ….
Schmidt v. Des Moines Pub. Sch., ____F.Supp. 2d___(S.D. Iowa Sept. 23, 2010), is an interesting case. A federal district court in Iowa held that a school district did not violate a non-custodial parent’s substantive due process, procedural due process, and equal protection rights under either the federal or state constitutions by refusing to allow her access to her children during school hours.
Divorce always presents tricky issues and this case demonstrates how such issues can spill over into Education Law.