Butler Giraudo & Meister
Peoria 309-407-3332
Morton 309-263-1204

A simple question that raises complicated constitutional issues p3

The case we have been discussing, V.L. v E.L., has been on the U.S. Supreme Court's agenda since the end of December. The court is not ready to hear arguments, though. The parties -- and the rest of us -- are waiting to find out if the court will hear the case at all. We had hoped to have an update by now, but we will have to continue to be patient.

The case is not strictly about whether same-sex couples can adopt. One of the women gave birth to the three children at the center of the visitation dispute, while the other acted as (and was accepted as) the children's parent.

Because the couple could not marry in their home state of Alabama or in Georgia, the state in which the adoption took place, the adoption cannot be treated the same way that a step-parent adoption is. Nor can V.L. claim to be a "putative" mother to the children, because she clearly did not give birth to them. Had she been a man, she could have claimed paternity and had some standing when it came to visitation. And, had she been a man and the couple had been married, Alabama law -- and Illinois law, for that matter -- would have recognized her as their father.

When V.L. adopted the children, E.L. executed a "parental consent to adoption," stating that she was not giving up her parental rights at all by agreeing that V.L. could adopt the children. Unfortunately, the parental consent did not include a provision that addressed custody or visitation in the event the couple broke up. When that happened, then, and E.L. did not want V.L. to have access to the children, the Alabama court was left to evaluate the case based on the agreement and state law.

The trial court agreed with V.L., but the case got even more complicated on appeal.

Instead of looking at the parenting question, the appellate court and, later, the Alabama Supreme Court, looked at the adoption itself. The two courts agreed that the adoption itself was flawed: The adoption violated Georgia state law and, so, was invalid. No adoption, no visitation issue.

The question presented to SCOTUS, then, is not about same-sex marriage or same-sex adoption, or even adoption at all. The question is whether one state can refuse to recognize a judgment issued by a court in another state. The Constitution's full faith and credit clause guarantees that states recognize judgments made in other states.

If the court agrees to hear the case, the arguments should be interesting. The court, after all, is under no obligation to answer the question presented. The court may decide that the issue the parties want addressed is not the core issue of the case -- just as the Alabama Supreme Court did.

We'll keep an eye on the case.


Newsroom America, "U. of I. News: Gay adoption: A Minute With... U. of I. expert Sara R. Benson," Jan. 5, 2016

SCOTUS Blog, "Opening a new phase of law for gays?" Lyle Denniston, Nov. 17, 2015

No Comments

Leave a comment
Comment Information
  • I cannot even express in words the level of gratitude that I feel. ‘Thank you’ doesn't seem to be enough. Please know that your services and compassion will never be forgotten! I am forever grateful!

  • Thank you so much for your hard work and expertise. I feel as a father in the state of Illinois that what I am trying to achieve is nearly impossible. I am so glad I chose to have your office full of extremely intelligent women represent me.

  • We would like to say thank you for your expertise, education, and kindness when we met with you! Your confidence has helped to comfort us and give us hope that resolution of the issue is possible.

  • I just wanted to say thank you from the bottom of my heart for all your time, energy, and efforts you put into our case. Thank you for helping make our son's quality of life better. I cannot tell you how happy we are!

More Testimonials
Contact Us Today

Contact Our Lawyers About All Areas Of Family Law

We are driven and committed to a successful outcome for all of our clients. To arrange a consultation with attorney Susan Butler, Kelly Giraudo or Tamara Meister, call 309-263-1204 (Morton) or 309-407-3332 (Peoria). You can also contact our law firm by filling out the form below. With offices in both Peoria and Morton, we work hard for our clients while getting to know them as people.

Bold labels are required.

Contact Information

The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.


Privacy Policy

Morton Office
100 S. Main Street
Morton, IL 61550

Toll Free: 888-314-9667
Phone: 309-263-1204
Morton Law Office Map

Peoria Office
110 SW Jefferson Street
Suite 410
Peoria, IL 61602

Toll Free: 888-314-9667
Phone: 309-407-3332
Peoria Law Office Map

Morton Office Peoria Office