The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of a lesbian woman seeking visitation rights for her adopted children in an opinion released on Monday.
The opinion, which was unsigned and which had no noted dissents, stated that the adoption decree granted to the woman, which was granted by a Superior Court in Georgia, must be respected and cannot be invalidated in Alabama.
The case involved a lesbian couple identified as V. L. and E. L., who had a relationship and lived together in Georgia from 1995 to 2011. While living in Georgia, E. L. had three children with assistive reproductive technology. The couple decided to ensure legal parental rights for V. L., and V. L. received a decree of adoption as a second parent from the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia. To note, E. L. was present at the proceedings and gave consent to V. L.'s adoption without surrendering her own parental rights to the children.
(Second parent adoption, also known as co-parent adoption, is a legal process that allows a gay or lesbian individual to adopt the biological child of his or her partner, regardless of whether the couple is married, without requiring the biological mother or father to surrender all of his or her rights to the child as a parent.)
Later in 2011, however, after the couple moved to Alabama, they broke up, after which V. L.'s parental rights then came under question. V. L. initially was able to see the children, but when visitation soon became a problem, and she filed a lawsuit against E. L. in Jefferson County Family Court in Birmingham, asking the court to recognize the adoption decree she received in Georgia, which was granted. Thereafter, E. L. filed an appeal with the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals, and then with the Supreme Court of Alabama.
Alabama's Supreme Court ruled that the adoption decree granted by the Georgia Superior Court was void due to the fact that it was not in accordance with one of Georgia's statutes which states, "a child who has any living parent or guardian may be adopted by a third party ... only if each such living parent and each such guardian has voluntarily and in writing surrendered all of his or her rights to such a child."
However, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Monday that regardless of what the state statute says, it "does not speak in jurisdictional terms," meaning that that particular statute does not have the ultimate authority on matters related to adoption.
Instead, the Supreme Court ruled that the adoption decree granted by the Georgia Superior Court must be respected because of a Georgia law which states that "the superior courts of the several counties shall have exclusive jurisdiction in all matters of adoption," meaning the Superior Courts in Georgia have the ultimate authority in all matters of adoption in the state. Therefore, the state of Alabama must respect the decision made by Georgia's Superior Court according to the "Full Faith and Credit Clause" in the Constitution, the Supreme Court stated.
"I have been my children's mother in every way for their whole lives," said V. L. in a statement. "I thought that adopting them meant that we would be able to be together always. When the Alabama court said my adoption was invalid and I wasn't their mother, I didn't think I could go on."
Though the case involves a lesbian woman and the Supreme Court's decision has been lauded by LGBT supporters and activists, some argue that the case had less to do with the woman's rights as a lesbian, but more on the idea of jurisdiction -- how much authority one court's ruling has in another court, and whether one state's court could invalidate the ruling of a court in another state.
"Neither the federal nor Alabama court opinions referred in any depth to the circumstances of the adoption or to the significant changes in legal recognition of same-sex couples," wrote Jess Bravin of the Wall Street Journal. However, Bravin noted, Albama's Supreme Court has been known to be in opposition to federal court rulings in favor of same-sex couples.
