2014—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 113–183, § 301(f)(2)(C), inserted designations for pars. (1) to (9) and “The term” after each designation.
Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 113–183, § 301(f)(2)(A), substituted “individual contestant or the parties have consented in a record or open court that the tribunal of the State may continue to exercise jurisdiction to modify its order,” for “individual contestant”.
Subsec. (e)(2)(A). Pub. L. 113–183, § 301(f)(2)(B), substituted “individual contestant and the parties have not consented in a record or open court that the tribunal of the other State may continue to exercise jurisdiction to modify its order” for “individual contestant”.
1997—Subsec. (f)(4). Pub. L. 105–33, § 5554(1), substituted “a court having jurisdiction over the parties shall issue a child support order, which must be recognized.” for “a court may issue a child support order, which must be recognized.”
Subsec. (f)(5). Pub. L. 105–33, § 5554(2), inserted “under subsection (d)” after “jurisdiction”.
1996—Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 104–193, § 322(1), substituted “subsections (e), (f), and (i)” for “subsection (e)”.
Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 104–193, § 322(2), inserted par. defining “child’s home State”.
Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 104–193, § 322(3), inserted “by a court of a State” before “is made” in introductory provisions.
Subsec. (c)(1). Pub. L. 104–193, § 322(4), inserted “and subsections (e), (f), and (g)” after “located”.
Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 104–193, § 322(5), inserted “individual” before “contestant” and substituted “subsections (e) and (f)” for “subsection (e)”.
Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 104–193, § 322(6), substituted “modify a child support order issued” for “make a modification of a child support order with respect to a child that is made” in introductory provisions.
Subsec. (e)(1). Pub. L. 104–193, § 322(7), inserted “pursuant to subsection (i)” after “order”.
Subsec. (e)(2). Pub. L. 104–193, § 322(8), inserted “individual” before “contestant” in subpars. (A) and (B) and substituted “with the State of continuing, exclusive jurisdiction for a court of another State to modify the order and assume” for “to that court’s making the modification and assuming” in subpar. (B).
Subsec. (f). Pub. L. 104–193, § 322(10), added subsec. (f). Former subsec. (f) redesignated (g).
Subsec. (g). Pub. L. 104–193, § 322(11), substituted “Modified” for “Prior” in heading and “subsections (e) and (f)” for “subsection (e)” in text.
Pub. L. 104–193, § 322(9), redesignated subsec. (f) as (g). Former subsec. (g) redesignated (h).
Subsec. (h). Pub. L. 104–193, § 322(12), inserted “including the duration of current payments and other obligations of support” before comma in par. (2) and “arrears under” after “enforce” in par. (3).
Pub. L. 104–193, § 322(9), redesignated subsec. (g) as (h).
Subsec. (i). Pub. L. 104–193, § 322(13), added subsec. (i).
Pub. L. 113–183, title III, § 301(f)(3)(B), “(i) The amendments made by subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (2) [amending this section] shall take effect on the date on which the Hague Convention of 23 November 2007 on the International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance enters into force for the United States [The Convention entered into force for the United States “(ii) The amendments made by subparagraph (C) of paragraph (2) [amending this section] shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act [
Amendment by Pub. L. 105–33 effective as if included in enactment of title III of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, Pub. L. 104–193, see section 5557 of Pub. L. 105–33, set out as a note under section 608 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare.
For effective date of amendment by Pub. L. 104–193, see section 395(a)–(c) of Pub. L. 104–193, set out as a note under section 654 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare.
Pub. L. 103–383, § 2, “(a) The Congress finds that—“(1) there is a large and growing number of child support cases annually involving disputes between parents who reside in different States;“(2) the laws by which the courts of different jurisdictions determine their authority to establish child support orders are not uniform;“(3) those laws, along with the limits imposed by the Federal system on the authority of each State to take certain actions outside its own boundaries—“(A) encourage noncustodial parents to relocate outside the States where their children and the custodial parents reside to avoid the jurisdiction of the courts of such States, resulting in an increase in the amount of interstate travel and communication required to establish and collect on child support orders and a burden on custodial parents that is expensive, time consuming, and disruptive of occupations and commercial activity;“(B) contribute to the pressing problem of relatively low levels of child support payments in interstate cases and to inequities in child support payments levels that are based solely on the noncustodial parent’s choice of residence;“(C) encourage a disregard of court orders resulting in massive arrearages nationwide;“(D) allow noncustodial parents to avoid the payment of regularly scheduled child support payments for extensive periods of time, resulting in substantial hardship for the children for whom support is due and for their custodians; and“(E) lead to the excessive relitigation of cases and to the establishment of conflicting orders by the courts of various jurisdictions, resulting in confusion, waste of judicial resources, disrespect for the courts, and a diminution of public confidence in the rule of law; and“(4) among the results of the conditions described in this subsection are—“(A) the failure of the courts of the States to give full faith and credit to the judicial proceedings of the other States;“(B) the deprivation of rights of liberty and property without due process of law;“(C) burdens on commerce among the States; and“(D) harm to the welfare of children and their parents and other custodians.“(b) In view of the findings made in subsection (a), it is necessary to establish national standards under which the courts of the various States shall determine their jurisdiction to issue a child support order and the effect to be given by each State to child support orders issued by the courts of other States.“(c) The purposes of this Act [enacting this section and provisions set out as a note under section 1 of this title] are—“(1) to facilitate the enforcement of child support orders among the States;“(2) to discourage continuing interstate controversies over child support in the interest of greater financial stability and secure family relationships for the child; and“(3) to avoid jurisdictional competition and conflict among State courts in the establishment of child support orders.”