United States v. Kras case brief

United States v. Kras case brief summary

409 U.S. 434 (1973)

CASE SYNOPSIS

Appellant, the United States, sought review of a judgment from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York holding the bankruptcy fee provisions of the Bankruptcy Act, 11 U.S.C.S. §§ 68(c)(1), 76(c), and 80(a), unconstitutional as applied to appellee, an indigent petitioner in bankruptcy. Appellee challenged the fees on U.S. Constitutional amendment V grounds.

DISCUSSION

• The Supreme Court reversed a judgment holding the bankruptcy fee provisions of the Bankruptcy Act, 11 U.S.C.S. §§ 68(c)(1), 76(c), and 80(a), unconstitutional as applied to appellee, an indigent petitioner in bankruptcy. 
• Appellee challenged the bankruptcy fees on U.S. Constitutional amendment V grounds. 
• The Supreme Court ruled that a prior decision in a divorce case holding that a state could not deny access because of poverty to a judicial proceeding that was the only effective means of resolving a dispute did not extend to no-asset bankruptcy proceedings. 
• According to the court, an inability to dissolve marriages impaired the freedom to pursue protected associational activities, while an interest in eliminating debt, although important, did not rise to the same constitutional level. 
• No fundamental interest depended on the availability of a discharge in bankruptcy. 
• The government's role with respect to the private commercial relationship was qualitatively and quantitatively different from its role in the establishment, enforcement, and dissolution of marriage. 
• Also, the filing fee did not deny equal protection of the laws where there was a rational justification for the fee provision.

CONCLUSION

The court reversed a judgment holding the bankruptcy fee provisions of the Bankruptcy Act unconstitutional as applied to appellee, an indigent petitioner in bankruptcy. The court ruled that a prior decision holding that a state could not deny access because of poverty to divorce proceedings did not extend to no-asset bankruptcy proceedings where no fundamental interest depended on the availability of a discharge in bankruptcy.