Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U.S. 374 (1978), was a U.S. Supreme Court decision that held that Wisconsin Statutes §§ 245.10 (1), (4), (5) (1973) violated the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause.

[2] In 1972, Roger Redhail, then in high school, was sued in a paternity action in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin.

Since Redhail was in high school at the time, he had no way to pay the court costs or child support.

Meanwhile, Redhail's noncustodial child was a public charge, and received $109 per month as support from the State of Wisconsin.

Due to the aforementioned § 245.10(1), one of the agents of the county clerk denied his application because he did not have a court order allowing him to marry.

Finding that the Wisconsin statute created two separate classes of individuals, Reynolds then proceeded to observe that under a number of Supreme Court decisions,[4] marriage was held to be a fundamental right.

Accordingly, the judge applied strict scrutiny to determine whether the Wisconsin statute could survive constitutional review.

[8] Applying this standard, Marshall examined the same two justifications that the District Court confronted—child welfare and counseling noncustodial parents about their obligations.

Powell's primary concern is that the near-application of strict scrutiny and the use of the equal protection clause is too strong and interferes with the legitimate regulation of the State on marriage.

The intent of his opinion is to illustrate that distinctions between married and unmarried people are largely acceptable, whereas bars to marriage itself should be treated with skepticism.

Examining the record of the District Court and of oral arguments, he finds that it was never verified that Redhail could not pay for his child support obligations.