I’m not a lawyer, so my answer is better than a lawyer would give you because they love this kind of crap.

As in other cases where the feds force the states to run unconstitutional programs for them (the old 55mph, some welfare programs including child support, etc), the feds use extortion: “pass this law that’s unconstitutional for us to pass or lose federal funding for…whatever is vaguely associated with the law”, in this case fed subsidies for welfare, food stamps, etc. So yeah, it’d be possible, but not likely. Tho you mention Wyoming, IIRC only Montana ignored the 55mph extortion. ($5 non-moving ticket for ‘wasting gas’)

If there were some state where “deadbeat dads” would not have their wages garnished or be subject to imprisonment for failure to pay court ordered alimony or child support, that would seem to give that state a competitive advantage in attracting some fraction of the 30% of the male population that find themselves with those obligations. Corporations could open branch offices there knowing that even though they pay lower wages there, their workers would be keeping a lot more of their income than they would elsewhere.

I would guess that Wyoming would be a state that might try this since it could use the additional economic development and because their reaction when the Federal government threatened to cut off funds because they were insufficiently zealous in enforcing the 55 MPH speed limit was to reply that they would stop plowing the snow from I-80 and I-90.

And frankly married parents can’t be forced to pay for college, so why should divorced parents be forced to?

This is similar to my situation going to university. Divorced parents, no planning for my education, squabbling over who would provide support — upshot, neither did. Applied for financial aid, disclosed parental assets — upshot, no aid. Aid advisor suggested suing my parents, though when I asked on what basis, it seemed a little … unclear. Realistically, that wasn’t an option. They were being dorks, clearly, but I wasn’t going to litigate a family squabble. Plus I was 19, and was an independent adult, after all.

The State raised my daughter’s child support payments (she’s the payee) the same month she quit a job as a government contractor…she was unaware that they had tripled her payment to $600 based on her current salary until after she quit…however, because she wasn’t making payments during her job search, she was listed as deadbeat, which means she lost her security clearance…

When she went to court to try to get the payments lowered to reflect her (now) lower salary, she was informed she had to find a job “equivalent to the one previously held” – but of course, without a clearance, she couldn’t do that…

Nevertheless, she now has to pay $600 (plus interest) monthly out of a $1400 monthly salary while meeting a car payment and daycare for her other (custodial) child…plus, because of her “base” salary, she isn’t eligible for Medicaid…if she didn’t live in my spare bedroom, she would be better off on welfare…

This is just the latest in the decades-long trend towards the infantalization of young people. Only a few decades ago the average 23 year old would already be married with kids and would have already been working for several years. A 23 year old would have been considered a fully-responsible adult, with all the expectations of supporting himself like an adult. Today, legislators can talk about 23 year old children with a straight face. How long until we’re not considered to be adults until we’re 30?