US Supreme Court Overturns Alabama Court, Restores Parental Rights In lesbian Adoption Case
BY KELSEY STEIN and Kent Faulk
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday overturned an Alabama court’s refusal to recognize a same-sex adoption and denial of visitation rights to a lesbian mother.
The unanimous decision was issued early Monday. The short ruling says that the Alabama Supreme Court overstepped its authority by not recognizing the adoption that had been granted in Georgia.
A woman identified in court documents as V.L. sought visitation rights after splitting with her lesbian partner, identified as E.L., who gave birth to three children between 2002 and 2004 when the couple was together.
The ruling issued Monday restores full rights as an adoptive parent to V.L.
“I am overjoyed that the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Alabama court decision,” the adoptive mother, V.L., said in a prepared statement. “I have been my children’s mother in every way for their whole lives. 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. The Supreme Court has done what’s right for my family.”
The case was first appealed to the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals. That court ruled in October 2014 that a Jefferson County judge had erred when he granted the woman – identified in court documents as V.L. – visitation rights. But then that appeals court reversed itself in February. The case was then appealed to the Alabama Supreme Court.
On Sept.18 the Alabama Supreme Court issued an order refusing to recognize V.L.’s Georgia adoption and declaring it void. The court found that Alabama did not have to recognize adoption by V.L. of her partner’s biological children because it found the Georgia court didn’t properly apply state law.
V.L. was represented by attorneys with the National Center for Lesbian Rights, who said the Alabama Supreme Court disregarded clear precedent with that ruling.
In November, the adoptive mother filed an appeal of the Alabama Supreme Court ruling that denied her visitation rights. Her request said “this Court’s review of the Alabama Supreme Court’s decision is urgently needed” because “the Alabama Supreme Court’s decision flouts a century of precedent on the Full Faith and Credit Clause and will have a devastating impact on Alabama adoptive families.”
In December, the U.S. Supreme Court blocked the Alabama Supreme Court’s ruling in the case, temporarily granting V.L. visitation rights.
NCLR attorneys lauded the ruling as a landmark victory for adoptive parents across the country.
“The Supreme Court’s reversal of Alabama’s unprecedented decision to void an adoption from another state is a victory not only for our client but for thousands of adopted families,” NCLR Family Law Director Cathy Sakimura, who is representing V.L., said in a news release. “No adoptive parent or child should have to face the uncertainty and loss of being separated years after their adoption just because another state’s court disagrees with the law that was applied in their adoption.”
In addition to the National Center for Lesbian Rights, V.L is represented by Adam Unikowsky and Paul Smith of Jenner & Block, and Alabama attorneys Heather Fann of Boyd, Fernambucq, Dunn & Fann, P.C., and Traci Vella of Vella & King, Attorneys at Law.
The children’s Guardian Ad Litem is Tobie J. Smith of the Legal Aid Society of Birmingham, who is represented by Marc Hearron of Morrison & Foerster LLP.
AL.com reporter Kent Faulk contributed to this report.
What about the sperm donor? Does he have any visitation rights?
….I think the law is well-established on the rights of sperm donors and the couples they agree to donate to. Usually a contractual matter, and it is spelled out in that contract. I guess there are lawyers who specialize in that kind of thing, “I’m a real estate lawyer. And you? Oh, I’m a tax lawyer. How about you? I’m a sperm and egg donor lawyer.”
Generally he can visit for 30 seconds, just like the first time.
Now that’s funny. Glad I can laugh with you again.
✔︎.
While I have issues with the overall good of same sex adoptions, if she was granted adoptive rights than it is the law. But it is strange when the adoptive parent in cases like this one has more rights than the biological parent.
It’s not our’s to question anyone’s love, but if one loves another of the same gender, than one should accept the full circumstances of that relation. One circumstance being that two of the same gender can not produce a child.
The biological mother wanted her lover to adopt, but it appears she then wanted to change her mind when things did not work out as she hoped. Could she do that if her partner had been male?
Comments are closed.