Opinion ID: 2624926
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Constitutional challenges to the marriage consent statute

Text: As mentioned, NRS 122.025 permits a minor less than sixteen years old to marry if the minor has the consent of one parent and authorization from the district court. [10] In his petition, Kirkpatrick asserts that, because the consent of only one parent was required, he was deprived of his fundamental right to the parent-child relationship without a compelling reason. [11] In effect, Sierra's marriage places her beyond his parental control and releases him, without opportunity to be heard, from his obligations as her father. He may no longer enforce parental rules and restrictions upon her, as he no longer has parental rights and responsibilities for her care, custody, control and support. Likewise, Sierra may no longer look to him for her care and support. Additionally, Kirkpatrick maintains that his procedural due process rights were infringed upon because he was not provided with notice and an opportunity to be heard and to object to his daughter's marriage before the court authorized it. Thus, Kirkpatrick raises both substantive and procedural due process challenges to Nevada's marriage consent statute. [12]