Oren Adar and Mickey Ray Smith, a same-sex couple, adopted a 1 year-old boy in Shreveport, Louisiana in 2006 and took him home to New York. They completed the adoption process in New York and legally became the child's parents. The family later moved to San Diego, where they live now. The problem arose when they tried to obtain an amended birth certificate for their son from the state of Louisiana. Their case demonstrates how family law can vary from state to state and the difficulty in bringing a family case from one jurisdiction to another.
The Louisiana registrar of vital records and statistics denied Adar and Smith's request to be listed jointly as the child's parents on the birth certificate. Louisiana only allows joint adoption of a child by married couples. Louisiana does not recognize same-sex marriage. Therefore, as far as the state of Louisiana was concerned, the two were not married and could not both appear on the birth certificate.
While the registrar's office agreed to recognize the legality of the adoption and list one of them as a parent on the birth certificate, Adar and Smith insisted that they both be listed. They filed a federal civil rights claim, alleging that Louisiana's actions denied full recognition of the New York adoption decree and thus violated the Constitution's "full faith and credit" clause. That clause declares that each state must give "full faith and credit" to the judicial decrees of each other state. By refusing to list both legal parents on the birth certificate, Louisiana was effectively trying to negate the full legal effect of the adoption decree, according to Adar and Smith's suit.
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans disagreed with Adar and Smith and dismissed the case. The court held in April 2011 that the question was actually legislative, not judicial, so the "full faith and credit" clause does not apply. It also concluded that each state has the right to create its own laws regarding birth certificates based on its own findings about what would benefit families and children in that state. Louisiana, the court declared, could conclude that adopted children would be best served by either a married couple or single person rather than "the freely severable relationship of unmarried partners." Of course, the court's logic only applies in a state that does not recognize same-sex marriage.
Adar and Smith appealed the Fifth Circuit’s dismissal. On Tuesday, October 11, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear their appeal. It did not offer any comment.
This case illustrates the wide variety of legal views on family relationships among U.S. states. Family law has traditionally operated at the state and local level, with minimal federal involvement. States pass laws that tend to reflect the values of that community. The family laws of New York will differ from those of Louisiana or California. Community values and viewpoints change from place to place, and they change over time. A California family attorney must understand how seemingly conflicting family laws may interact, especially with a mobile population that moves from state to state and brings family disputes with it.
San Diego certified divorce lawyer Thomas Huguenor has 35 years experience helping people pursue family law matters in California and arriving in California from around the country. For a free and confidential consultation, contact him today.
More Blog Posts:
Which Court Has Custody Of A Child Custody Case? San Diego Divorce Attorney Blog, October 3, 2011
Child Custody Move Away Cases Increase, San Diego Divorce Attorney Blog, September 28, 2011
Child Custody in San Diego and Military Towns--Effort to Impose a Federal Standard, San Diego Divorce Attorney Blog, May 19, 2010
