by Deb Denison
Pennsylvania child support laws require each parent in a separated family to support their children. In the early 1990's, some courts attempted to extend this support obligation to include secondary education costs. In 1992, in a case entitled Blue vs. Blue, the Supreme Court declined to recognize a parent's duty to provide secondary education support. This opinion relied on the fact that neither the General Assembly or case law imposed such a duty on parents. In 1993, the General Assembly responded with the passage of Act 62 known as "The Blue Legislation." Prior to the Blue legislation, the parental obligation for child support ended at the age of 18 or graduation from high school, whichever came first. The Blue legislation created an extended obligation to pay college or other secondary education costs, including tuition, room and board and books. The factors considered in educational support were the income of the parties, the cost of the education and the ability of the child to earn an income. The Blue legislation caused an influx of claims for support from children enrolled in secondary educational institutions.
The Blue legislation also resulted in an influx of challenges and appeals based on constitutional principles. Under the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution, all individuals are entitled to equal protection under the law. In short, like persons in like circumstances are entitled to be treated similarly under the law. The challenges to the Blue legislation argued that by obligating separated parents to pay secondary education costs, the law was treating intact families differently than separated families in violation of the 14th Amendment.
This constitutional challenge was upheld in some counties and struck down in others. In Dauphin County, the Court upheld the constitutionality of the legislation and permitted secondary education support. In October 1995, the Supreme Court heard the West Chester County case of Curtis vs. Kline which addressed secondary education support. The Supreme Court struck down the Blue legislation as unconstitutional. The Court found no rational basis to empower only certain adult citizens with the legal means to receive financial support for secondary education. They found no fundamental difference between the children of divorce and those of intact families. The dissenting opinion called the majority shortsighted for not recognizing the impact divorce has on parents and their children and for ignoring the public interest in ensuring education for our younger generation.
The Pennsylvania ruling is one of very few state rulings holding similar legislation unconstitutional. As a result, pending secondary education support cases will be dismissed and existing support orders will be challenged and overturned. The only way to rectify this ruling is for the legislature to make all parents liable for secondary education costs; an unlikely occurrence.