Supreme Court Rejects 2 Dads on Birth Certificate Case

The United States Supreme Court recently refused to hear a case involving a same-sex couple who unsuccessfully sought to put both of their names on their adopted son’s birth certificate – a big victory for conservative pro-family organizations.

The rejection by the high court kept in place a previous federal court of appeals ruling that denied the gay couple’s request to change the biological parents’ names on their adopted son’s birth certificate with their own.

Following Louisiana state law, which allowed only married couples to jointly adopt a child, a state registrar refused the two unwed men, Mickey Smith and Oren Adar, their request in 2006.

Get Our Latest News for FREE

Subscribe to get daily/weekly email with the top stories (plus special offers!) from The Christian Post. Be the first to know.

Subscribe

She did, however, offer to put only one of their names on the birth certificate since the state allowed single-parent adoption.

Accusing the registrar of violating the Equal Protection Clause and the Full Faith and Credit Clause – with New York recognizing the couple as parents – Smith and Adar, represented by Lambda Legal, sued.

Though initially winning the first round of lawsuits, Smith and Adar ultimately lost their case when it went to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals before a full 16-judge panel.

A majority of the judges believed that the Full Faith and Credit Clause did not oblige Louisiana to enforce the “public acts, records and judicial proceedings” of other states contrary to their own law. They also did not find that the Equal Protection Clause was violated.

Now, with the Supreme Court’s recent rejection of the case, the ruling by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals remains in place, to the praise of pro-family advocates.

“This decision is a big victory against the relentless efforts of activists to export same-sex unions to states that affirm the mother-father paradigm for family,” said Mathew Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, which filed an amicus brief in the case.

“The Full Faith and Credit Clause can no longer be used as a club to force states to redefine marriage and the family.”