Amicus Curiae Brief — V.L. v. E.L., 136 S. Ct. 1017 (2016) (No. 15-648)

Supreme Court brief2016

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

errne Ca iri, U fe

FLED

DEC 17 2015

No. 15-648 OFFICE OF THE CLERK

IN THE

Supreme Court of the Hnited States

V.L., Petitioner

Vv.

E.L. AND GUARDIAN AD LITEM, AS REPRESENTATIVE

OF MINOR CHILDREN, Respondents.

On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari

to the Alabama Supreme Court

BRIEF OF GAY & LESBIAN ADVOCATES & DEFENDERS,

EQUALITY ALABAMA FOUNDATION, EQUALITY

FEDERATION, GEORGIA EQUALITY, HUMAN RIGHTS

CAMPAIGN, IMMIGRATION EQUALITY, NATIONAL

CENTER FOR TRANSGENDER EQUALITY, NATIONAL

BLACK JUSTICE COALTION, NATIONAL LGBTQ TASK

FORCE, PFLAG, SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER,

AND STONEWALL BAR ASSOCIATION OF GEORGIA AS

AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER

Gay & LESBIAN ADVOCATES & FOLEY HOAG LLP

DEFENDERS Claire Laporte

Gary D. Buseck Marco J. Quina*

Mary L. Bonauto Catherine Deneke

30 Winter Street, Suite 800 Jenevieve Maerker

Boston, MA 02108 Kevin J. Conroy

(617) 426-1350 155 Seaport Blvd.

Boston, MA 02210

(617) 832-1000

mquina@foleyhoag.com

*Counsel of Record

ood

TABLE OF CONTENTS

_ , a ereaeserer i

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES .............ccc00...ccccossccsceesees ii

STATEMENT OF INTEREST ..................00c000000eeeeee0e 1

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT.................00ccceeeceseeeeeees 5

IIIT cncccsrcisntinsiinisinmenimiansicaiuitnaidiiienmindiiimaniaian 7

I. Full Faith and Credit Is Critical for Same-

Sex Couples and Their Children...................... 7

A. Same-Sex Couples Rely on Adoption

and Parentage Judgments to

Protect their Families............................ 7

B. Full Faith and Credit Ensures the

Stability and Reliability of

Judgments Given the Variance in

| Se oe a 13

C. Full Faith and Credit Is

Particularly Important for Same-

Sex Couples Because of Continued

Objections to Their Families............... 17

Il. Certiorari Should Be Granted to Undo the

Damage the Alabama Court Has Done to

Adoption and Parentage Judgments

PNT reccscmniinsennnepmensinbenssinantetoeannen 25

Tee eee eee ne = 28

‘

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

United States Supreme Court Cases

Atherton v. Atherton,

REESE Transom women: 27

Baker v. Gen! Motors Corp.,

Ey EE, HITE TITIED Uicissienteenantecntnetentabenanneenaieoiennn 25

Coe v. Coe.

EES NRE ea Sea eee nrr 27

Estin v. Estin.

I 27, 28

Johnson v. Muelberger.

eee 28

Lawrence v. Texas.

reer 7

Lehman v. Lycoming Cnty. Children’s Servs.

Agency,

I a ecicerictniccmisncienntinctsimmanints 9, 10

Obergefell v. Hodges,

0 passim

Sherrer v. Sherrer,

I ia iain 26

Sutton v. Lieb.

RRS nea renee eee ee se 28

iii

United States v. Windsor,

I 7,10

Vanderbilt v. Vanderbilt,

SEES Re RN TT Io 27

Williams v. North Carolina,

Ee A ee re 26, 27

Williams v. North Carolina,

I 27

Federal Circuit Court of Appeals Cases

Eleventh Circuit in Lofton v. Sec'y Dept. of

Children & Family Servs,

358 F.3d 804 (Lith Cir. 2004) .00........ccccccccceeeseeees 18

Federal District Court Cases

Searcy v. Strange.

81 F. Supp. 3d 1285 (S.D. Ala. 2015) ................. 21

Strawser v. Strange,

2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8439 (S.D. Ala.

REESE RRS Sea ee re eee 21

State Court Cases

Adoption of M.A.,

930 A.2d 1088 (Me. 2007) ..........cccccccceseeeeeereeeeeees 14

Adoption of Tammy,

619 N.E.2d 315 (Mass. 1993)............. 11, 12, 14, 15

Ark. Dept. Human Servs. v. Cole,

380 S.W.3d 429 (Ark. 2011) ...........ccccceeeeeeeeeeeeeees 20

B.P. v. State (In re Adoption of Luke),

640 N.W.2d 374 (Neb. 2002)...........cccccccsesseseeeeeees 16

Boseman v. Jarrell,

704 8.B.24 404 (N.C. 3010)....ccccccsssccccccccscscecssees 16

Bottoms v. Bottoms,

a ee We iccstecccnccntsnsectsnisescctnsenes 20

Charisma R. v. Kristina S.,

96 Cal. Rptr. 3d 26 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009) ............ 16

Chatterjee v. King,

i ee 16

Department of Human Services v. Howard,

lt Lk 19

Elisa B. v. Superior Court,

117 P.3d 660 (Cal. 2006) ........cseccsccsscerssereess 12, 16

Ex parte D.W.W.,

717 So. 2d 793 (Ala. 1998) ........cccccseseeeseeeseeeseees 21

Ex parte H.H.,

Ns RID I, ID sn ciintninincsdcinniounisnneniionntit 20

Ex parte J.M.F.,

730 So. 2d 1190 (Ala. 1998) ............ccccccecsseccsceoees 21

Ex parte State ex rel. Ala. Policy Inst.,

2015 Ala. LEXIS 33 (Ala. Mar. 3, 2015)............. 22

Ex Parte State ex rel. Ala. Policy Inst. v. Alan

L. King, No. 1140460 (Ala. Filed Oct. 5,

Tsien nia teeenaitelipneeitna seen tieiadaemanienatniimneennneen 23

Ex parte State ex rel. Ala. Policy Inst.,

No. 1140460 (Ala. June 29, 2015)

(Corrected Order), available at

https://localtvwhnt.files.wordpress.com/201

5/06/1140460-order. pdf .................cccccccccceeeeeeeeeeees 23

Fla. Dep't of Children & Families v. X_X.G.,

45 So. 3d 79 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)............... 18

Georgina G. v. Terry M. (In the Interest of

Angel Lace M.),

516 N.W.2d 678 (Wis. 1994) .........ccccccsecssesseeeesees 16

In re Adoption of Doe,

719 N.E.2d 1071 (Ohio Ct. App. 1998)............... 16

In re Adoption of K.S.P.,

804 N.E.2d 1253 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004).......... 14, 15

In re Adoption of R.B.F.,

I I titi ences 14

In re Adoption of Two Children by H.N.R.,

666 A.2d 535 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div.

OEE TERE fea eer ele trenee eareeme en 14, 15

In re BL.V.B.,

Fe) LL 0 14, 15

In re Doe,

396 P.3d 347 Cdaho 8014) ....0ccccccccccccccccscccceseseees 14

In re Jacob,

660 N.E.2d 397 (N.Y. 1995)............... 11, 12, 14, 15

In re K.M.,

653 N.E.2d 888 (Ill. App. Ct. 1995) ...........000008 14

In re K.RS.,

109 So. 3d 176 (Ala. Ct. App. 2012)..............00008 16

In re M.M.D.,

663 A.Bd BST (D.C. 10GB) .cccccocccrococccccccccccesccccccees 14

In re Robert O. v. Russell K.,

604 N.E.2d 99 (N.Y. 1992) ..........ccccccccesseceeeeeeeeeee 10

In re the Parental Responsibilities of A.R.L.,

318 P.3d 581 (Colo. App. 2013)............:cccccsceeeeeee 16

Kemp & Assocs. v. Chisholm,

162 So. 3d 172 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)........... 10

Opinion of the Justices,

525 A.2d 1095 (N.H. 1987)........ccccccccceseesereeeeeeenes 19

vii

Pulliam v. Smith,

Be ee i, Bi ccsccccceacceceseicncsonnennss 20

S.ALS. v. TLS.,

265 S.W.3d 804 (Ky. Ct. App. 2008)................... 16

Sharon S. v. Superior Court,

73 P.3d 554 (Cal. 2008)............ccccrecssccsscrssrees 14, 15

Statutory Authorities

ia 11

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 19°5-203(1)(0.5) .........ccccseseseseseeees 14

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 45a-724(a)(3) oo... ccccecceeeeeeeees 14

Ga. Code Ann. § 19-8-12(a)(1) ...............cccccceeeeeeeeeees 11

Idaho Code Ann. § 16-1501A(2)(a) .0.........cccccceeeeeeees 11

Miss. Code. Ann. § 93-17-3(5) ................ceseeceeeeeeeeeees 20

Mont. Code Ann. § 42-1 108(2)(b) and (d)............... 11

Mont. Code Ann. § 42-4-302(2)...........cccccceccsseseeeeeees 14

OR OF Ren 11

Utah Code Ann. § 78B-6-102(5)fa) 0.00.0... cccceeeeeeeeeee 11

Utah Code Ann. § 78B-6-117(3). ..........cccccccceseeseeeeees 19

vill

Legislative Authorities

H.R. 90, 1999 Sess. (N.H. 1999), available at

http://gencourt.state nh.us/

SofS_Archives//1999/house/HB9OH.................

Other Authorities

Am. Acad. of Pediatrics, Policy Statement,

Promoting the Well-Being of Children

Whose Parents are Gay or Lesbian, 131

Pediatrics 827 (2013), available at

http-://pediatrics.

aappublications.org/content/131/4/827.full.

Am. Assoc. of Family Physicians, Chi/dren’s

Health (2002), http://www.aafp.org/

about/policies/all/children-health. htm! ..........

Am. Civil Liberties Union, Map of States

Where Same-Sex Couples Are Able to Get

Joint or Second Parent

Adoptionhttps://www.aclu.org/map-states-

where-same-sex-couples-are-able-get-joint-

or-second-parent-adoption ................cccceceeeeeees

Am. Med. Assoc., H-60.940: Partner Co-

Adoption, http://www.ama-

assn.org/ama/pub/about-ama/our-

people/member-groups:sections/glbt-

advisory-committee/ama-policy-regarding-

sexual-orientation. page. ..................cceeceeeeeeeees

eases 13

Am. Psychiatric Assoc., Adoption and Co-

parenting of Children by Same-sex

Couples: Position Statement (Nov. 2002) ........... 13

Am. Psychological Assoc., Sexua/ Orientation,

Parents, and Children (2004),

http://www.apa.org/

about/policy/parenting.aspx ....................ceceeeeeeees 13

Ballotpedia, Local government responses to

Obergefell v. Hodges, (October 29, 2015),

https://ballotpedia.org/

Local_government_responses_to_Obergefel

TAU III ih ciratncedeealicelareaiinilnasininiandeninialangtientesiinies 24

David L. Chambers & Nancy D. Polikoff,

Family Law and Gay and Lesbian Family

Issues in the Twentieth Century, 33 Fam.

le a ae SS 18, 19, 20

Brief for The Donaldson Adoption Institute,

et al. as Amici Curiae Supporting

IIIT Uli cinidicssiteintendntnidabeniiginbinpmnmnncuseienetontie 12

Kent Faulk, A/abama will grant equal rights

to married gay couples, lawyers say,

AL.com (July 14, 2015),

http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index

.ssf/2015/07/state_agencies_will_grant_sam

Kent Faulk, Alabama judge asks not to have

to wed same-sex couples, rejects license to

engage in sodomy’, AL.com (Sept. 16,

2015),

http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index

.ssf/2015/09/

probate_judge_asks_alabama_sup.html............. 23

Gary J. Gates, The Williams Institute, LGB7

Parenting in the United States (2013),

available at

http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-

content/uploads/ LGBT-Parenting.pdf.............. 8,9

Chris Geidner, With U.S. Supreme Court

Silent, Alabama Chief Judge Aims to Stop

Same-Sex Marriages, BuzzFeed (Feb. 8,

2015),

http://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/with

-us-supreme-court-silent-alabama-chief-

NG Us ctciceneaninissentinstnniniintinitiondicinenncemmnets 22

Chris Geidner, Alabama Chief Justice's

Comments Cause Confusion for Marriage

Equality in the State, BuzzFeed (July 1,

2015), http://www.buzzfeed.com/

chrisgeidner/ alabama-supreme-court-

order-causes-confusion-for-marriage-e@. ............ 23

Ralph Jimenez, N.H. Near Repeal of Antigay

Provision, Foster Parenting, Adoption at

Issue, Boston Globe, Apr. 23, 1999, at B1........... 19

Philip W. Johnston, Policy Statement on

Foster Care (May 24, 1985), reprinted in

Boston Globe, May 25, 1985, at 24...................... 18

Movement Advancement Project et al., LGBT

Families of Color: Facts At A Glance 2

(2012), available at

http-://nbjc.org/sites/default/files/lgbt-

families-of-color-facts-at-a-glance.pdf ................... 8

Movement Advancement Project et al., A//

Children Matter: How Legal and Social

Inequalities Hurt LGBT Families 79-80,

87 (2011), available at

http://www.lgbtmap.org/file/all-children-

gg ke

Nat'l Assoc. of Soc. Workers, Socia/] Work

Speaks: National Association of Social

Workers Policy Statements, 2003-2006 (6th

Sri easschdnseseseiceepcecesaeumapieiteitehtciidaainhdecnieiaelaeictiaidaisebaeidindiinai 13

Nancy D. Polikoff, A Mother Should not Have

to Adopt Her Own Child: Parentage Laws

for Children of Lesbian Couples in the

Twenty-First Century, 5 Stan. J. C.R. &

C.L. 201, 211, 217-18 (2009) ...............scesseeeesees 15

Randall Terry, Episode 699 - Chief Justice

Roy Moore Interview on Supreme Court’s

Abuse of Power, (July 7, 2015),

https://m.youtube.com/watch?

v=ATaYTPGjY8U, at 00°17, 28°39. .0............cccee 22

xii

U.S. Census Bureau, Supplemental Table:

Same-Sex Unmarried Partner or Spouse

Households by Sex of Householder by

Presence of Own Children: 2010 Census

and 2010 American Community Survey,

http://www.census.gov/

hhes/samesex/files/supp-table-AFF.xls (last

eee 8

Lynn D. Wardle, The Potential Impact of

Homosexual Parenting on Children, 1997

U. IL. L. Rev. 833, 838 (1997) ..............:cccccceeeeeeeee 17

Lynn D. Wardle, Sexua/ Orientation: Law

and Policy: Parenthood and the Limits of

Adult Autonomy, 24 St. Louis U. Pub. L.

Be ee hiocensticntarescnenntniccnssiniininounioians 17

STATEMENT OF INTEREST

Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders works in

New England and 0~»nationally to _ eradicate

discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and

transgender (“LGBT”) people and people with

HIV/AIDS from all communities, through litigation,

public policy advocacy, and education.! GLAD has

participated as counsel or amicus in numerous state

cases about adoption and parenting and has served

as counsel in state and federal courts in cases about

the families of same-sex couples.

Equality Alabama Foundation is an Alabama

nonprofit organization, with a membership

exceeding 8,000 throughout the State of Alabama. It

seeks, through education and advocacy, to advance

equality for LGBT Alabamians where they live,

work, learn, and play. Equality Alabama has

worked to advance the rights of same-sex couples to

marry and raise children, and has participated in

Alabama courts as amicus.

Equality Federation is a partner to state-based

equality organizations advocating on behalf of

lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer

people. Since 1997, it has worked throughout the

country with its member organizations to make

! Undersigned counsel has authored this amicus brief in whole,

and no other person or entity has funded its preparation or

submission. All counsel of record were given timely notice of

the intention to file this brief, and have consented in

correspondence on file with the clerk.

legislative and policy advances on marriage,

nondiscrimination, safe schools, healthy

communities, and more.

Georgia Equality’s mission is to advance

fairness, safety, and opportunity for LGBT

communities throughout Georgia. In its twenty-year

history, it has advocated for stronger protections for

parents who may face discrimination based on their

sexual orientation or gender identity.

Human Rights Campaign, the largest national

LGBT political organization, envisions an America

where LGBT people are ensured of their basic equal

rights, and can be open, honest, and safe at home, at

work, and in the community. Among those basic

rights is freedom to have full legal recognition of our

families.

Immigration Equality is the nation’s largest

legal service provider for LGBT and HIV-positive

immigrants. Each year, Immigration Equality

provides legal advice to nearly 5,000 individuals and

families, maintains an active docket of more than

550 immigration cases, and regularly appears in

federal circuit courts as counsel or amicus curiae.

The National Center for Transgender Equality,

founded in 2003, is dedicated to improving the lives

of transgender people and their families through

advocacy, education, and collaboration. NCTE works

with Congress, federal agencies, and state and local

advocates and stakeholders to advance public

policies that will improve transgender people's lives

in areas including employment, health care, housing,

and education.

The National Black Justice Coalition is

dedicated to the empowerment of Black LGBT people

and families. Since 2003, NBJC has provided

leadership at the intersection of national civil rights

groups and LGBT organizations, advocating for the

unique and often overlooked challenges and needs of

the African American LGBT community. NBJC

envisions a world where all people are fully

empowered to participate safely, openly, and

honestly in family, faith, and community, regardless

of race, class, gender identity, or sexual orientation.

Since 1973, the National LGBTQ Task Force has

worked to build power, take action, and create

change to achieve freedom and justice for LGBT

people and their families. As a progressive social

justice organization, the Task Force works toward a

society that values and respects the diversity of

human expression and identity and achieves equity

for all.

PFLAG is the nation’s largest LGBTQ family

and ally nonprofit organization, with more than

200,000 members and supporters and 400 affiliates,

including eight chapters in Alabama and eight in

Georgia. PFLAG’s members are parents, children,

grandparents, siblings, and friends of lesbian, gay,

bisexual, transgender, and queer individuals.

Founded in 1972, PFLAG is committed to advancing

equality and full societal affirmation of LGBTQ

people through its threefold mission of support,

education, and advucacy.

The Southern Poverty Law Center is a nonprofit

organization founded in 1971 that has worked to

make this nation’s constitutional ideals a reality for

everyone since its inception. SPLC’s LGBT Rights

Project is dedicated to fighting discrimination

against the LGBT community in all its forms, and

defending the rights of LGBT people and their

families.

The Stonewall Bar Association of Georgia, Inc.

was founded to develop a coalition of legal workers to

utilize their professional expertise to support the

rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender

people and oppose discrimination based on sexual or

gender orientation, and to support individuals and

organizations that make contributions to improving

the quality of life for LGBT Georgians.

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT

This case raises compelling grounds for review

by this Court. Children and families nationwide rely

on the _ security, stability, and predictability

conferred by adoption and parentage judgments.

Those judgments confirm and dignify the bonds

formed between parent and child, encourage

nurturing and secure relationships, and promise

stability to families wherever they go. If children

cannot rely on the filial bond with their parents,

they, their parents, and society will all suffer harm.

Judgments of parentage and adoption, and the

promise of love and nurturing that they carry,

cannot be ephemeral in a humane society, and the

Full Faith and Credit Clause must ensure that they

are not. As this case demonstrates, if the Full Faith

and Credit Clause can be as easily circumvented as

it was by the Alabama Supreme Court, the parent-

child relationship will be only as strong as the credit

it will be given in the most restrictive states. Such a

result will weaken adoption and parentage

judgments nationwide.

This case is a part of our continuing national

conversation about legal respect for the relations

formed by and between same-sex couples, including

those who raise children. These parents and their

children rely on adoption and parentage judgments

to protect their families. But state law still varies as

to how, when, or even if these parent-child

relationships will be given legal respect. According

full faith and credit to adoption and parentage

judgments that these families have obtained is

critical to their security and integrity given

continuing objections to the families of same-sex

couples.

The Alabama Supreme Court’s disregard for the

Full Faith and Credit Clause weakens the bonds

that join our nation and our families. The Alabama

court’s ruling harms our most vulnerable citizens —

our children — who need security and stability more

than anyone else. This Court has a rich tradition of

granting certiorari to ensure that full faith and

credit is given to family-related judgments in times

when family law differs from state to state. It

should do so here.

ARGUMENT

I. Full Faith and Credit Is Critical for Same-Sex

Couples and Their Children.

Like heterosexual couples, many same-sex

couples share the basic human desire to have and

nurture children. As this Court recognized in

Lawrence v. Texas, “lplersons in a homosexual

relationship... seek autonomy” for “personal

decisions relating to marriage... family

relationships, child rearing, and education.” 539

U.S. 558, 574 (2003). Children of those families also

desire “to understand the integrity and closeness of

their own family and its concord with other families

in their community and in their daily lives.” United

States v. Windsor, 133 S. Ct. 2675, 2694 (2013).

Ensuring that full faith and credit is given to

adoption and parentage judgments is crucial given

the long history of discrimination against same-sex

parents and the patchwork of state laws that

confronts them.

A. Same-Sex Couples Rely on Adoption and

Parentage Judgments to Protect their

Families.

Same-sex couples with children are a part of the

landscape of our nation’s families. “{Slame-sex

couples provide loving and nurturing homes to their

children, whether biological or adopted. And

hundreds of thousands of children are presently

being raised by such couples.” Obergefel/ v. Hodges,

135 S. Ct. 2584, 2600 (2015). More than 125,000

households headed by same-sex couples are raising

nearly a quarter of a million children across the

United States.? Including children raised by single

parents, almost two million children are being raised

by gay or lesbian parents in the United States.’

There are same-sex couples raising children in

virtually every county in the United States, with the

South having some of the highest rates of

childrearing among same-sex couples.‘ According to

Census data, in Georgia and Alabama alone, over

5,500 households headed by same-sex couples have

children under age 18.5 Same-sex couples of color

are more likely than white couples to be raising

children.®

2 Gary J. Gates, The Williams Institute, LGBT Parenting in the

United States (2013), available at

http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/

LGBT-Parenting.pdf.

3 Am. Acad. of Pediatrics, Policy Statement, Promoting the

Well-Being of Children Whose Parents are Gay or Lesbian, 131

Pediatrics 827 (2013), available at http‘//pediatrics.

aappublications.org/content/131/4/827.full.pdf.

‘ Gates, supra note 2.

5 See U.S. Census Bureau, Supplemental Table: Same-Sex

Unmarried Partner or Spouse Households by Sex of

Householder by Presence of Own Children: 2010 Census and

2010 American Community Survey, http://www.census.gov/

cease immaaiaaieees (last visited Dec. 15,

2015).

® Movement Advancement Project et al., LGBT Families of

Color’ Facts At A Glance 2 (2012), available at

Same-sex couples often form their families

through adoption. These couples are four times

more likely than their different-sex counterparts to

be raising an adopted child.? Thirteen percent of

same-sex parents have adopted a child.* In total,

more than 16,000 same-sex couples are raising about

22,000 adopted children in the United States.9

Legal respect for the parent-child relationship

often springs from state adoption and parentage

laws. “Most States have allowed gays and lesbians

to adopt, either as individuals or as couples, and

many adopted and foster children have same-sex

parents.” Obergefel/l, 135 S. Ct. at 2600. This

provides “powerful confirmation from the law itself

that gays and lesbians can create loving, supportive

families.” Jd.

Adoption and parentage judgments provide

children and families the stability they need.

Adoption, like marriage, “affords the permanency

and stability important to children’s best interests.”

Id. Legal respect for parent-child relationships

provides security to children and confers dignity on

the family and the parent-child relationship. See

Lehman v. Lycoming Cnty. Children’s Servs. Agency,

http://nbjc.org/sites/default/files/gbt-families-of-color-facts-at-a-

glance.pdf.

7 Gates, supra note 2.

8 Jd.

9 Id.

458 U.S. 502, 513 (1982) (“[C]hildren require secure,

stable, long-term, continuous relationships with

their parents.... There is little that can be as

detrimental to a child’s sound development as

uncertainty over” that relationship.). An adoption or

a finding of parentage confers legal and social

meaning on the child’s bonds with his or her parent

and should be respected no matter where the child or

parent may go. See Windsor, 133 S. Ct. at 2694

(discussing benefits to children of legal recognition of

marriages); Obergefell, 135 S. Ct. at 2600 (same).

Thus, adoption and parentage judgments must

be respected to ensure permanency and stability. As

one state appellate court has recently emphasized in

giving full faith and credit to an out-of-state

adoption:

The importance of finality in the lives of the

children involved in the adoption process is so

obvious as to require little elaboration. One of

the most crucial elements of a _ healthy

childhood is the availability of a stable home

in which each family member has a secure

and definite place.... [If full faith and credit is

denied,] such children — as well as their

adoptive families — would be forever relegated

to a state of legal limbo.... Clearly, such a

result... cannot be tolerated in a legal system

that concerns itself with humane values....

Kemp & Assocs. v. Chisholm, 162 So. 3d 172, 178

(Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015) (quoting Jn re Robert O. v.

Russell K., 604 N.E.2d 99, 106-07 (N.Y. 1992)

(Titone, J., concurring)).

For this reason, Georgia’s adoption statute

recognizes that state’s “interest in... providing stable

and permanent homes for adoptive children....

Adoptive children have a right to permanence and

stability in adoptive placements.” Ga. Code

Ann. § 19-8-12(a)(1), (2). Accord Idaho Code

Ann. § 16-1501A(2)(a), (c); Mont. Code Ann. § 42-1-

108(2)(b), (d) (2015); S.C. Code Ann. § 63-9-810; Utah

Code Ann. § 78B-6-102(5)(a), (c).

Legal respect for the parent-child relationship

confers benefits on children and parents alike. It

allows parents to obtain family health insurance

covering the children and to make medical decisions

for them. See Adoption of Tammy, 619 N.E.2d 315,

320 (Mass. 1993); Jn re Jacob, 660 N.E.2d 397, 399

(N.Y. 1995).!° Parents without a legal relationship

to their children may not be able to claim their

children as dependents for tax purposes. See 26

U.S.C. § 152(f)(1).

If the parents’ relationship dissolves, legal

parentage protects children from being “denied the

affection of a functional parent who has been with

them since birth.” Adoption of Tammy, 619 N.E.2d

at 320. Without an adoption or parentage judgment,

parents and their children risk being denied

visitation. In some cases, an adoptive parent may

seek to avoid responsibility for the child after a

10 See generally Movement Advancement Project et al., Ad/

Children Matter: How Legal and Social Inequalities Hurt

LGBT Families 79-80, 87 (2011), available’ at

http://www.lgbtmap.org/file/all-children-matter-full-report.pdf.

separation, and an adoption or parentage judgment

can ensure that the child will receive support. £.z.,

Elisa B. v. Superior Court, 117 P.3d 660, 669 (Cal.

2005).

In the event of a parent’s death, an adoption or

parentage judgment allows a child to obtain Social

Security benefits,!! to inherit from family trusts,!? to

inherit by intestate succession,!3 to bring wrongful

death claims,’ and to receive life insurance

benefits.'5 Legal recognition of the surviving parent

can ensure that the child can remain in that parent’s

custody after tragedy.'® Legal respect for the parent-

child relationship is so important for children’s well-

being that many medical and professional

11 Adoption of Tammy, 619 N.E.2d at 320; In re Jacob, 660

N.E.2d at 399; 42 U.S.C. §§ 402(d), 416(e).

12 Adoption of Tammy, 619 N.E.2d at 317, 320.

13 In re Jacob, 660 N.E.2d at 399; Adoption of Tammy, 619

N.E.2d at 320.

14 In re Jacob, 660 N.E.2d at 399.

15 Td.

16 See Brief for The Donaldson Adoption Institute, et al. as

Amici Curiae Supporting Petitioners at 18, Obergefell v.

Hodges, 135 S. Ct. 2584 (2015) (No. 14-556); Adoption of

Tammy, 619 N.E.2d at 320 n.9.

organizations have long supported legal respect for

families headed by same-sex couples.!7

B. Full Faith and Credit Ensures the

Stability and Reliability of Judgments

Given the Variance in State Law.

In many same-sex families, the adults set out to

form a family by, for example, fostering children in

state care, adopting a child, or using medically

available assisted reproductive services. Before the

nationwide availability of marriage in Obergefell,

and with it the possibility of step-parent adoption or

‘7 American Academy of Pediatrics: Am. Acad. of Pediatrics,

supra note 3, at 828;

American Medical Association? Am. Med. Assoc., H-60.940:

Partner Co-Adoption, http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/about-

ama/our-people/member-groups-sections/glbt-advisory-

committee/ama-policy-regarding- sexual-orientation.page:

" ry ical / ion: Am. Psychological Assoc.,

oud Orientation, a and Children (2004),

http://www.apa.org/ about/policy/parenting.aspx;

American Psychiatric Association: Am. Psychiatric Assoc.,

Adoption and Co-parenting of Children by Same-sex Couples:

Position Statement (Nov. 2002);

National Association of Social Workers: Nat'l Assoc. of Soc.

Workers, Social Work Speaks: National Association of Social

Workers Policy Statements, 2003-2006 (6th ed.);

American Association of Family Physicians: Am. Assoc. of

Family Physicians, Children’s Health (2002),

http://www.aafp.org/ about/policies/all/children-health. html.

joint adoption as a married couple, often there was

only one legal parent in a family headed by a same-

sex couple: the one adoptive parent or the birth

parent.

During this period, states developed varying

approaches to the children of same-sex couples. At

least twelve states and the District of Columbia have

now, by statute or appellate court decision,

authorized second-parent adoption, through which

an unmarried adult co-parent may adopt the child of

his or her partner.'® Trial or county courts in other

states have also recognized such adoptions.'®

18 Cahfornia: Sharon S. v. Superior Court, 73 P.3d 554 (Cal.

2003); Colorado: Colo. Rev. Stat. § 19-5-203(1)(d.5);

Connecticut: Conn. Gen. Stat. § 45a-724(a)(3); District of

Columbia: Jn re M.M_D., 662 A.2d 837 (D.C. 1995); Idaho: Jn re

Doe, 326 P.3d 347 (Idaho 2014); Illinois: Jn re K.M., 653 N.E.2d

888 (Ill. App. Ct. 1995); Indiana: Jn re Adoption of K.S.P., 804

N.E.2d 1253 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004); Maine: Adoption of M.A., 930

A.2d 1088 (Me. 2007); Massachusetts: Adoption of Tammy, 619

N.E.2d 315 (Mass. 1993); Montana: Mont. Code Ann. § 42-4-

302(2); New Jersey: Jn re Adoption of Two Children by H.N.R.,

666 A.2d 535 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1995); New York: Jn re

Jacob, 660 N.E.2d 397 (N.Y. 1995); Pennsylvania: Jn re

Adoption of R.B.F., 803 A.2d 1195 (Pa. 2002); Vermont: Jn re

B.L.V.B., 628 A.2d 1271 (Vt. 1993); Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 15A, § 1-

102.

19 See generally Am. Civil Liberties Union, Map of States

Where Same-Sex Couples Are Able to Get Joint or Second

Parent Adoption, https://www.aclu.org/map-states-where-same-

sex-couples-are-able-get-joint-or-second-parent-adoption (last

visited Dec. 16, 2015).

Courts allowing such adoptions have resolved

disputed questions of statutory interpretation based

on the language and purposes of the adoption

statutes in accord with established canons of

construction. For example, in /n re B.L.V.B., 628

A.2d at 1273, the Vermont Supreme Court ruled that

the state’s adoption statutes must be interpreted to

“avoid results that are irrational, unreasonable, or

absurd.” The court continued,

[W]e cannot conclude that the legislature ever

meant to terminate the parental rights of a

biological parent who intended to continue

raising a child with the help of a partner.

Such a narrow construction would produce the

unreasonable and irrational result of

defeating adoptions that are otherwise

indisputably in the best interests of children.

Id. at 1274. Many other states have reached similar

conclusions.2°

Other states have allowed same-sex couples to

obtain parentage judgments through state parentage

laws,21_ which empower courts to declare the

20 See, e.g., Sharon S., 73 P.3d at 561; Adoption of Tammy, 619

N.E.2d at 321; Jn re Jacob, 660 N.E.2d at 399, 404; Jn re

Adoption of Two Children by H.N.R., 666 A.2d at 538; Jn re

Adoption of Infant K.S.P., 804 N.E.2d at 1257.

21 Many of these laws are modeled on the Uniform Parentage

Act, first promulgated in 1973. See generally Nancy D.

Polikoff, A Mother Should not Have to Adopt Her Own Child:

Parentage Laws for Children of Lesbian Couples in the

existence of legal parent-child relationships based on

facts such as birth, marriage, or “holding out” a child

as one’s own. See, e.g., Elisa B. v. Superior Court,

117 P.3d 660 (Cal. 2005); Chatterjee v. King, 280

P.3d 283, 288 (N.M. 2012); see also In re the

Parental Responsibilities of A.R.L., 318 P.3d 581

(Colo. App. 2013); Charisma R. v. Kristina S., 96 Cal.

Rptr. 3d 26 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009).

While most state appellate courts considering

second-parent adoptions have concluded that these

adoptions are permissible, some state courts

(including Alabama’s) have held that second-parent

adoptions by an unmarried same-sex couple are not

permissible under those states’ adoption statutes,

even where the statutes themselves may be similar

to those interpreted more broadly in other states.??

This divergence among state laws has the potential

to wreak havoc unless the states accord full faith

and credit to one another’s adoption and parentage

judgments

Twenty-First Century, 5 Stan. J. C.R. & C.L. 201, 211, 217-18

(2009).

22 Alabama: Jn re K_R.S., 109 So. 3d 176 (Ala. Ct. App. 2012).

See also Kentucky: S.Jj.L.S. v. T.L.S., 265 S.W.3d 804 (Ky. Ct.

App. 2008); North Carolina: Boseman v. Jarrell, 704 S.E.2d

494 (N.C. 2010); Nebraska: BP. v. State Un re Adoption of

Luke), 640 N.W.2d 374 (Neb. 2002); Ohio: Jn re Adoption of

Doe, 719 N.E.2d 1071 (Ohio Ct. App. 1998): Wisconsin:

Georgina G. v. Terry M. Un the Interest of Angel Lace M.), 516

N.W.2d 678 (Wis. 1994).

C. Full Faith and Credit Is Particularly

Important for Same-Sex Couples Because

of Continued Objections to Their Families.

The Alabama Supreme Court’s decision in this

case must be viewed against the backdrop of

objections to same-sex couples’ relationships and

parenting. Objectors have long argued that the law

should not recognize the relationships between

people of the same sex and should not recognize

their status as parents.2* These objections featured

in arguments, already familiar to this Court, that

parenting by a biological mother and father is

“optimal,” and that same-sex couples should,

therefore, be disqualified from marriage. See, e.z.,

Brief for Respondent Michigan at 39-40, 46,

Obergefell v. Hodges, 135 S. Ct. 2584 (2015) (No. 14-

571). The State of Alabama was among the

objectors, asserting its interest in promoting

2 See, eg. Lynn D. Wardle, The Potential Impact of

Homosexual Parenting on Children, 1997 U. Ill. L. Rev. 833,

838 (1997) (acknowledging same-sex couples as partners or

parents “shift[s]... the legal and socia] assumptions and legal

model of parenting”); Lynn D. Wardle, Sexua/ Orientation:

Law and Policy’ Parenthood and the Limits of Adult

Autonomy, 24 St. Louis U. Pub. L. Rev. 169, 178 (2005)

(adoptions by same-sex couples “redefine parenthood” from a

relationship that requires “commitment of both men and

women together to the best interests of children” to one

furthering the “child-rearing interests of any one or more

autonomous adults”); id at 187-88 (such adoptions deprive

children of gender-differentiated parenting).

ties of kinship between children and both of

their biological parents because, in general,

those parents together are best suited to

provide optimal care for their children.... In

contrast, children raised in same-sex

households are necessarily raised without one

or both biological parents in the home.

Brief for Alabama as Amici Curie Supporting

Respondents at 5, Obergefell v. Hodges, 135 S. Ct.

2584 (No. 14-556).

These objections found expression in bans on

gays and lesbians adopting or fostering children over

the last several decades. Florida enacted an

adoption ban in 1977 7% That ban, originally upheld

by the Eleventh Circuit in Lofton v. Sec’y Dept. of

Children & Family Serv’s, 358 F.3d 804, 827 (11th

Cir. 2004), was invalidated on state constitutional

grounds only five years ago. Fla. Dep't of Children &

Families v. X.X.G., 45 So. 3d 79 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App.

2010). In 1985, Massachusetts instituted a policy of

foster care placement in “traditional family settings,”

and its Department of Social Services removed two

boys from their foster care placement with a gay

couple.25 This led neighboring New Hampshire to

2 David L. Chambers & Nancy D. Polikoff, Family Law and

Gay and Lesbian Family Issues in the Twentieth Century, 33

Fam. L.Q. 523, 534 (1999).

25 Philip W. Johnston, Policy Statement on Foster Care (May

24, 1985), reprinted in Boston Globe, May 25, 1985, at 24;

Chambers & Polikoff, supra note 24, at 533, 536-37.

pass the first law banning gay people from serving

as foster or adoptive parents or operating a day care

facility, a ban that was upheld by the New

Hampshire Supreme Court. Opinion of the Justices,

525 A.2d 1095 (N.H. 1987).26 These bans, not

reversed until the 1990s, were fueled, at least in

part, by fears of AIDS and stereotypes of gay people

as predators.?’

From the mid-1990s on, similar proposed bans

were defeated in seven states but passed in others.”®

For example, Utah law provides that a person in a

cohabiting and non-marital sexual relationship may

not adopt. Utah Code Ann. § 78B-6-117(3). This

foreclosed same-sex couples from adopting until they

recently became able to do so as married couples. An

Arkansas regulation forbidding foster parenting

whenever a gay person was in the home, adopted in

1991, was invalidated less than a decade ago in

Department of Human Services v. Howard, 238

S.W.3d 1 (Ark. 2006). The Arkansas courts also

struck a subsequent ballot initiative forbidding

adoption and foster care by an unmarried person

26 The Massachusetts policy was changed in 1991, and the New

Hampshire law was repealed in 1999. See H.R. 90, 1999 Sess.

(N.H. 1999), available at http://gencourt.state.nh.us/

SofS_Archives//1999/house/HB90H pdf.

27 See, e.g. Ralph Jimenez, N.H. Near Repeal of Antigay

Provision, Foster Parenting, Adoption at Issue, Boston Globe,

Apr. 23, 1999, at Bi (quoting local officials about “AIDS

hysteria” and fears of child molestation as animating the ban).

28 Chambers & Polikoff, supra note 24, at 540—41.

cohabiting with a partner. Ark. Dept. Human Servs.

v. Cole, 380 S.W.3d 429 (Ark. 2011). Mississippi's

ban on adoption by same-sex couples, enacted in

2015, remains in place. See Miss. Code. Ann. § 93-

17-3(5) (“Adoption by couples of the same gender is

prohibited.”).

Sexual orientation has also been used to deny or

limit gays’ and lesbians’ custodial or visitation rights

upon divorce or separation. Through the 1970s and

1980s, gay and lesbian litigants lost more appellate

visitation and custody cases than they won.29 Some

state courts used sexual orientation to deny parental

rights altogether. See, e.g, Pulliam v. Smith, 501

S.E.2d 898 (N.C. 1998) (ordering reinstatement of

judgment stripping father of custody because he was

living with a partner of the same sex); Bottoms v.

Bottoms, 457 S.E.2d 102 (Va. 1995) (awarding

custody of two-year-old to grandmother because

mother was a lesbian and therefore unfit).

Even though most state parenting bans have

been repealed or overturned, erroneous stereotypes

linger. Because Alabama’s courts are the focus of

this case, a snapshot of the climate in that state and

its courts is illuminating. The Alabama Supreme

Court has on several occasions denied gay and

lesbian parents child custody and visitation based, in

part, on the rationale that these parents’ sexual

orientation made them unsuitable. See, eg. Ex

parte H.H., 830 So. 2d 21, 25-26 (Ala. 2002)

2° See Chambers & Polikoff, supra note 24, at 533, 536-37.

(deferring to trial court’s assessment of insufficient

basis for lesbian mother’s proposed modification of

custody award); id. at 33-35 (Moore, C.J.,

concurring) (“Homosexuality is strongly condemned

in the common law because it violates both natural

and revealed law.... The common law designates

homosexuality as an inherent evil, and if a person

openly engages in such a practice, that fact alone

would render him or her an unfit parent.”); Ex parte

D.W.W., 717 So. 2d 793, 796 (Ala. 1998) (“Exposing

her children to such a lifestyle, one that is illegal

under the laws of this state and immoral in the eyes

of most of its citizens, could greatly traumatize

them.”); Ex parte J.M.F., 730 So. 2d 1190, 1196 (Ala.

1998) (transferring custody from lesbian mother and

her partner to re-married father because “[w]hile the

evidence shows that the mother loves the child and

has provided her with good care,” she was exposing

her child “to a lifestyle” that was “neither legal in

this state, nor moral in the eyes of most of its

citizens”).

In addition, the Alabama courts have shown a

stunning disrespect for federal court judgments,

even judgments of this Court, that broaden

protections available to same-sex couples. In

January 2015, after a federal district court ruled

that Alabama’s marriage ban was unconstitutional

in Searcy v. Strange, 81 F Supp. 3d 1285 (S.D. Ala.

2015) and Strawser v. Strange, 2015 U.S. Dist.

LEXIS 8439 (S.D. Ala. Jan. 26, 2015), and while an

application for a stay was pending in this Court, the

Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama

wrote a letter to the Alabama Governor pledging to

uphold the _ state’s constitutional marriage

amendment, which banned marriages between

same-sex couples. The Alabama Chief Justice then

ordered probate judges and state officials not to

“issue or recognize a marriage license” contrary to

Alabama law. The next day, after this Court

denied a stay, marriage licensing began in several

counties, only to be halted by a March 3, 2015 ruling

by the Alabama Supreme Court prohibiting such

licenses statewide. Ex parte State ex rel. Ala. Policy

Inst., 2015 Ala. LEXIS 33, at *148—49 (Ala. Mar. 3,

2015) (per curiam).

Even Obergefel/] did not settle matters for the

Alabama Supreme Court.3! On June 29, 2015, that

court issued an order inviting parties to file briefs on

the effect of Obergefel] on the Alabama court’s orders

* Chris Geidner, With U.S. Supreme Court Silent, Alabama

Chief Judge Aims to Stop Same-Sex Marriages, BuzzFeed (Feb.

8, 2015), —http://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/with-us-

supreme-court-silent-alabama-chief-justice-aims-to-s (includes

the Order).

3%} The Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court has

publicly stated that he is “engaged in a conflict with” this

Court, calling Obergefel/ “a horrendous decision” that

“contradicts the Constitution.” Randall Terry, Episode 699

Chief Justice Roy Moore Interview on Supreme Court's Abuse

of Power (July 7, 2015), https://m.youtube.com/watch?

v=ATaYTPGjY8U at 00:17. He later elaborated: “Just because

he [Justice Kennedy] writes it doesn’t make it law....” Jd. at

28:39.

and suggesting that its earlier March ruling was still

in effect.32

It was not until July 14, in response to a lawsuit,

that the Alabama Attorney General confirmed that

Obergefell was binding on the state.*3 Since then, a

probate judge has requested a declaration that he be

exempted from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex

couples.** In October, activists opposed to marriage

equality filed yet another motion in the Alabama

Supreme Court urging the judiciary to defy

Obergefell, this time joined by an Alabama probate

judge. Ex Parte State ex rel. Ala. Policy Inst. v. Alan

L. King, No. 1140460 (Ala. Filed Oct. 5, 2015).

32 Ex parte State ex rel. Ala. Policy Inst., No. 1140460 (Ala.

June 29, 2015) (Corrected Order), available at

https:/Nocaltvwhnt.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/1140460-

order.pdf. Later statements from the Alabama Chief Justice

suggested that the court was not advising about local officials’

obligations to issue licenses. Chris Geidner, Alabama Chief

Justice’s Comments Cause Confusion for Marriage Equality in

the State, BuzzFeed (July 1, 2015), http://www.buzzfeed.com/

chrisgeidner/alabama-supreme-court-order-causes-confusion-

for-marriage-eq.

33 Kent Faulk, A/Jabama will grant equal rights to married gay

couples, Jawyers say, AL.com (July 14, 2015),

http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2015/07/state_ag

encies_will_grant_same.html.

“ Kent Faulk, Alabama judge asks not to have to wed same-sex

couples, rejects license to engage in sodomy’, AL.com (Sept. 16,

2015), http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2015/09/

probate_judge_asks_alabama_sup.htm).

Some Alabama probate court judges still refuse

to issue marriage licenses to otherwise qualified

same-sex couples. In fact, Alabama accounts for the

vast majority of counties nationwide refusing to

grant such licenses. Over 75% of the thirteen

counties nationally that do not grant such licenses

are in Alabama.*® About 15% of Alabama’s counties

refuse to grant same-sex marriage licenses,

compared to near-universal compliance in the rest of

the country.°* As a result, almost 6% of Alabama’s

population lives in a county that refuses to issue

same-sex marriage licenses, dwarfing the nationwide

rate of 0.1%.37

This history demonstrates that hostility towards

gay people is still entrenched in Alabama and its

courts. This state of affairs makes it even more

essential to enforce the Full Faith and Credit Clause

to ensure that local stereotypes do not undermine

judgments upon which children and families have

relied.

% Ballotpedia, Local] government responses to Obergefell v.

Hodges (Oct. 29, 2015), https://ballotpedia.org/

Local_government_responses_to_Obergefell_v._ Hodges.

%6 Jd.

7 Td.

It. Certiorari Should Be Granted to Undo the

Damage the Alabama Court Has Done to

Adoption and Parentage Judgments Nationwide.

The patchwork of state laws affecting the

children of same-sex parents creates a grave threat

to the security of children of same-sex couples when

they move from a state that respects their family

arrangements to one that does not. See supra

Section I.A. The Alabama court’s holding typifies

this threat and casts doubt on the consistency and

predictability of adoption and parentage judgments

nationwide.** If this Court allows the Alabama

court’s judgment to stand, dissatisfied parents or

even third parties will be emboldened to challenge

sister-state adoption judgments with which they

disagree. For example, parents seeking to avoid

adoption and parentage judgments could, after

separation, move to Alabama and make the same

arguments made by Respondent. Many adoption

and parentage judgments would be worth only the

respect that Alabama or other restrictive states

would accord them: none at all. The result would be

a back-door revival of the discredited “public policy

exception” to the principle of full faith and credit.

See Baker v. Gen. Motors Corp., 522 U.S. 222, 233

(1998) (there is “no roving public policy exception to

the full faith and credit due judgments”).

38 Amici concur with Petitioner’s analysis of the Full Faith and

Credit Clause and Georgia adoption law indicating that the

Alabama court disregarded both.

Such a result would be disastrous. A parent-

child relationship that should carry the promise of

stability and security should not be nullified by

relocation. The parent-child bond does not flicker on

and off as state lines are crossed. As this Court

explained in Obergefel/:

Being married in one state but having that

valid marriage denied in another is one of “the

most perplexing and distressing

complication{s]” in the law of domestic

relations. Leaving the current state of affairs

in place would maintain and promote

instability and uncertainty. For some couples,

even an ordinary drive into a neighboring

State to visit family or friends risks causing

severe hardship in the event of a spouse’s

hospitalization while across state lines. In

light of the fact that many states already

allow same-sex marriage... the disruption

caused by the recognition bans is significant

and ever-growing.

135 S.Ct. at 2607 (first alteration in original)

(quoting Williams v. North Carolina, 317 U.S. 287,

299 (1942)). Those concerns apply with even more

force to adoptions, given the vulnerability of

children, their dependency on the parent-child bond,

and their need for security and stability. Once a

court issues a judgment of adoption or parentage,

parents, children, and society must be able to count

on that judgment. The Alabama decision means

they no longer can.

Granting certiorari is also consistent with this

Court’s precedent. This Court has a rich history of

granting certiorari to define the contours of the Full

Faith and Credit Clause in the context of family law.

As views on divorce evolved throughout the early-to-

mid-20th century, a divide developed among the

states, with some favoring restrictive divorce laws

and others favoring permissive ones. During that

time, this Court considered several cases to refine

the scope of the Full Faith and Credit Clause as

applied to divorce, alimony, and other rights. See,

e.g., Atherton v. Atherton, 181 U.S. 155 (1899);

Williams v. North Carolina (Williams ), 317 U.S.

287 (1942); Williams v. North Carolina ( Williams ID,

325 U.S. 226 (1945); Coe v. Coe, 334 U.S. 378 (1948);

Estin v. Estin, 334 U.S. 541 (1948); Vanderbilt v.

Vanderbilt, 354 U.S. 416 (1957).

In granting certiorari in and deciding these cases,

the Court recognized the importance in the family

law context of the stability and predictability that

the Full Faith and Credit Clause ensures. As

Justice Douglas wrote for the Court, if marital status

were not subject to “the essential function of the full

faith and credit clause,” “a rule would be fostered

which could not help but bring considerable disaster

to innocent persons and bastardize children hitherto

supposed to be the offspring of lawful marriage.”

Williams I, 317 U.S. at 301 (internal quotations

omitted); see also Obergefell, 135 S. Ct. at 2607

(quoting Williams I, 317 U.S. at 299). Thus this

Court has emphasized the “obvious importance” of

enforcing the Full Faith and Credit Clause in the

context of family relations. Williams IJ, 325 U.S. at

227; see also Sherrer v. Sherrer, 334 U.S. 343, 356

(1948); (noting that “vital interests” were involved);

Johnson v. Muelberger, 340 U.S. 581, 583-84 (1951)

(case raised “important” issues); Sutton v. Lieb, 342

U.S. 402, 405 (1952) (same).

The Court has emphasized that “[t]he Full Faith

and Credit Clause is not to be applied, accordion-

like, to accommodate our personal predilections.”

Estin, 334 U.S. at 545-46. If that admonition is to

have any meaning, this Court must grant certiorari

to define and enforce the Full Faith and Credit

Clause in times like these, when state laws are in

conflict, and there is a risk that policy preferences

will override the Constitutional guarantee of full

faith and credit. See App. 3la (concurring opinion

below opining that Alabama “has a legitimate

interest in encouraging that children be adopted into

the optimal family structure, 1e., one with both a

father and a mother.”).

CONCLUSION

The Court should grant the petition for a writ of

certiorari.

Respectfully submitted,

GAY & LESBIAN ADVOCATES & FOLEY HOAG LLP