Image Source: Shutterstock | Florida Supreme Court
A Florida judge has sparked major controversy after comparing commercial surrogacy arrangements to “modern-day slavery” and questioning whether the practice violates the US Constitution.
Judge Marlon Weiss, a senior judge in Broward County appointed by Republican governor Ron DeSantis, made the remarks during a legal dispute involving a French same-sex couple who commissioned a surrogate mother in Florida.
The couple had petitioned the court in August 2025 to recognise them as the legal parents of the child before birth. Under Florida law, gestational surrogacy agreements are permitted, and the woman carrying the child is not recognised as the legal mother if certain legal requirements are met.
Judge Weiss ultimately granted the parental order, but issued an extraordinary ruling raising constitutional concerns about the surrogacy industry itself.
In the published opinion, Weiss argued that children are human beings with inherent rights and individuality, not commodities to be transferred through contracts.
He questioned whether commercial surrogacy arrangements conflict with the 13th Amendment to the US Constitution, which abolished slavery following the Civil War.
Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier later intervened in the case, supporting concerns about the growing international surrogacy industry and its treatment of women and children.
“Today, registered sex offenders and foreigners, including Chinese nationals, buy thousands of babies from US surrogacy companies,” Uthmeier wrote on social media. “This modern-day slavery is morally wrong, endangers children, and threatens national security. It must be stopped.”
The case has placed renewed scrutiny on the booming global surrogacy market, which was valued at more than $14 billion in 2023 and is projected to rise sharply over the next decade.
Commercial surrogacy arrangements in the United States can cost intended parents between $100,000 and $200,000, with surrogate mothers often receiving around $50,000.
Critics argue that the industry increasingly treats both children and women’s bodies as products for purchase, particularly when wealthy clients travel internationally to commission babies through agencies and fertility clinics.
Judge Weiss highlighted the extensive controls often imposed on surrogate mothers during pregnancy, including rules governing diet, travel, medical decisions, and lifestyle choices.
The case also comes amid growing political concern in Florida over international surrogacy arrangements. Earlier this year, Governor DeSantis backed legislation restricting surrogacy contracts involving citizens from so-called “countries of concern,” including China and Iran.
Although the child at the centre of the case remains with the couple and is unlikely to be removed from their care, the latter statements could have broader implications for the future of surrogacy law in the United States.
SPUC’s Communications Manager, Peter Kearney, notes: “This ruling is especially significant because it comes not from campaigners or activists, but from within the judiciary itself. Hopefully the world’s surrogacy capital, the US, will start to turn back the clock on this exploitative industry which leaves behind it a trail of preborn bloodshed when the eugenic selection is done. In a country whose history is defined by the moment they banned the buying and selling of people it is imperative that their laws on surrogacy catch up.
“As rumours of loosening surrogacy laws in Britain grow, we hope that the realisation that children are not commodities to be bought and sold will start to proliferate across the West.”
