The Coming Attack on an Essential Element of Women’s Freedom

For the past half century, many women in America have enjoyed an unprecedented degree of freedom and legal protection, not because of Roe v. Wade or antidiscrimination laws but because of something much less celebrated: “no fault” divorce. Beginning in the early 1970s, no-fault divorce enabled millions of people, most of them women, to file for divorce over “irreconcilable differences” or the equivalent without having to prove misconduct by a spouse—such as adultery, domestic violence, bigamy, cruelty, abandonment, or impotence.

But now conservative politicians in states such as Texas and Louisiana, as well as a devoutly Catholic husband who tried to halt his wife’s divorce efforts in Nebraska, are attacking no-fault divorce. One of the more alarming steps taken in that direction came from the Texas Republican Party, whose 2022 platform called on the legislature to “rescind unilateral no-fault divorce laws and support covenant marriage.” Given the Republican Party’s control of the offices of governor, secretary of state, and attorney general, and both chambers of the state legislature, Texas has a chance of actually doing it.

Until 1857, divorce in England—whose ecclesiastical laws formed the basis of divorce laws in most American colonies outside New England—was available only through an act of Parliament. A total of 324 couples managed to secure one; only four of those were initiated by women. Husbands could divorce their wives based solely on adultery, but women had to prove additional aggravating circumstances. Proof of brutality, rape, or desertion was considered insufficient to support a divorce. Not until 1801 did a woman, Jane Addison, finally win a divorce based on adultery alone.

[Helen Lewis: The conservative case for liberalizing divorce]

Divorce in the American colonies was often decided by governors, while colonial courts required the innocent spouse to prove marital fault by the other, making divorce virtually nonexistent. Married women were mostly bound by laws of “coverture,” which, in the words of the English jurist William Blackstone, meant that “by marriage, the husband and wife are one person in the law: that is, the very being or legal existence of the woman is suspended during the marriage, or at least is incorporated and consolidated into that of the husband: under whose wing, protection, and cover, she performs every thing.” As recounted by the historian Catherine Allgor, American women had no right to enter into contracts or independently own property, including their own wages and “the clothes on their backs.” Mothers lacked basic parental rights, too, “so that if a wife divorced or left a husband, she would not see her children again.”

State standards for divorce varied, including the number of times a man could assault his wife before divorce was allowed. (Marital rape was not illegal in all 50 states until 1993.) In 1861, a judge in New York City ruled that “one or two acts of cruel treatment” were not sufficient grounds to grant a woman a divorce, even after her husband beat her unconscious with a piece of wood during a fight over the family dog sleeping in their bed. The judge wrote that “the wife should not seek on slight provocation to dissolve that sacred tie which binds her to her husband for life, for better or worse.” As if the privacy intrusions of a trial were not enough, newspapers routinely publicized divorce cases, often blaming the woman wit