SAN FRANCISCO (CBS SF) — The nation’s high court has ruled that gay couples who adopt a child in one state cannot have that adoption voided by another state.

Monday the Supreme Court reversed an Alabama ruling that refused to honor a lesbian woman’s adoption in Georgia. The high court cited the Constitutions Full Faith and Credit clause which says states have a legal duty to honor agreements made in other states, and gay adoptions are no exception.

“The Georgia judgment appears on its face to have been issued by a court with jurisdiction, and there is no established Georgia law to the contrary. It follows that the Alabama Supreme Court erred in refusing to grant that judgment full faith and credit,” reads the ruling.


The matter first went to court in 2011 after a lesbian couple with three children in Georgia split up. The birth mother moved with the children to Alabama and denied the other woman’s right to visit. The latter sued for visitation arguing she had formally adopted the children, but the Alabama court ruled the adoption invalid because it was in Georgia.

The ruling is a victory for gay families.

“I am overjoyed that the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Alabama court decision,” said the adoptive mother in an interview with the Los Angeles Times. “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.”

Comments (13)
  1. John Simpson says:

    Can anyone provide the decision count? How many for and against, and what was Gursich’s vote?

  2. At some point we have to give due respect to gay families.

    1. A year ago there was a conservative majority on the Supreme Court. When Alito died it became a 50-50 split. Now that Gorsuch is in there, once again we have a conservative majority. It’s nice to know that our judges are truly impartial and will rule on constitionality rather than on their own political biases. And that is as it should be. At least one branch of our government is a keeper of checks and balances.

      1. I meant to say Scalia, not Alito. What was I thinking?

  3. Eileen Finn says:

    I think everyone who can give love should be able to adopt regardless if they are gay or straight. So many children are left in foster homes and abused. If a gay couple can love and nurture a child, why not?

  4. Gorsich not involved; this case was from 2016.

  5. It looks like inspite of having a conservative majority in the Supreme Court, we will have JUSTICE. This court will not be biased toward conservative issues and against liberal ones. Rather it will examine each case in relation to its constitutionaility, which is as it should be. Franklin Graham, please note!

  6. “The high court cited the Constitutions Full Faith and Credit clause which says states have a legal duty to honor agreements made in other states, and gay adoptions are no exception.”

    And other states should recognize my concealed carry permit.

  7. The one thing more offensive than all the sociopathic religious people trying to prevent or take away gay rights is a gay person trying to jump in to the court system to use that oppression against his/her ex. These people are worse than the oppressors. They are like the vile creature on Jabba the Hut’s shoulder…only they are right here among us and not a long time ago and far away.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s