V.L. v. E.L.

CAC Blasts Supreme Court’s Refusal to Review Ruling Stripping Lesbian Mother of her Children

 

Washington, DC – On news today that the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review the ruling of the Alabama Supreme Court in V.L. v. E.L., which refused to recognize a Georgia court’s judgment of adoption awarded to a lesbian mother, Constitutional Accountability Center issued the following reaction:

 

“Make no mistake,” said CAC Vice President Judith E. Schaeffer, “the lives of real people have been damaged by the U.S. Supreme Court’s abdication of its responsibility to hear this case.  Tragically, a mother and her children have been torn apart by a dreadful ruling of the Alabama Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Roy Moore, that ignored the Constitution’s clear command to give full faith and credit to the judgments of the courts of other states. The U.S. Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the mother’s appeal – and right this terrible wrong – leaves this family torn asunder.”

 

“It is essential that the Court recognize the awful signal it is sending with today’s decision,” continued CAC Appellate Counsel Brianne Gorod. “By declining to hear this case, the Court suggests that state officials with extreme anti-gay agendas like Chief Justice Moore can not only thumb their nose at the clear text and history of the Constitution, but they can also do so in a way that causes palpable harm to real people – many of whose lives were uplifted just this past summer when the Supreme Court recognized marriage equality as the law of the land. Refusing to hear this case is as inexplicable as it is unconscionable.”

 

#

 

CAC Hails Supreme Court’s Review of Decision Stripping Lesbian Mother of Her Children

 

Washington, DC – On news today that the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to review the ruling of the Alabama Supreme Court in  V.L. v. E.L., which refused to recognize a Georgia court’s judgment of adoption awarded to a lesbian mother, Constitutional Accountability Center issued the following reaction:

 

“Tragically,” said CAC Vice President Judith E. Schaeffer, “a mother and her children were torn apart by a dreadful ruling by Chief Justice Roy Moore and his colleagues on the Alabama Supreme Court that ignored the Constitution’s clear command to give full faith and credit to the judgments of the courts of other states. The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to hear the mother’s appeal provides the Justices with a chance to correct this terrible wrong and vindicate the family’s rights under the Constitution.”

 

#

 

Resources:

 

CAC “friend of the court” brief in V.L. v. E.L.: http://theusconstitution.org/cases/vl-v-el-us-sup-ct

 

“The U.S. Supreme Court Should Remind Roy Moore That It Has the Final Say on the U.S. Constitution,” Brianne Gorod and Judith E. Schaeffer, Huffington Post, January 8, 2016: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brianne-j-gorod/the-us-supreme-court-shou_b_8940328.html 

 

##

 

Constitutional Accountability Center (www.theusconstitution.org) is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history.

 

###

More from

Rule of Law
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

Comey v. Department of Justice

In Comey v. Department of Justice, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York is considering whether the Attorney General can fire an Assistant U.S. Attorney in contravention of legal protections...
Civil and Human Rights
July 18, 2026

Arnie Arnesen Attitude July 16 2026

Attitude with Arnie Arnesen
CAC’s David H. Gans joined The Attitude with Arnie Arnesen to discuss the Reconstruction Amendments. Listen...
Access to Justice
----- Supreme Court -----

Crowther v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia

In Crowther v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, the Supreme Court is considering whether employees of federally funded educational institutions can bring Title IX suits for sex discrimination.
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

Wridt v. City of New York

In Wridt v. City of New York, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York is considering whether the NYPD’s mass surveillance system is unconstitutional.
Federal Courts and Nominations
July 16, 2026

CAC Release: Todd Blanche’s Record Disqualifies Him From Serving as America’s Lawyer

WASHINGTON, DC – In response to this week’s confirmation hearings on Todd Blanche’s nomination to...
By: Praveen Fernandes
Rule of Law
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

DHS Probationary Employees 1 Class v. Department of Homeland Security

In DHS Probationary Employees 1 Class v. Department of Homeland Security, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is considering whether the Trump Administration’s efforts to unilaterally reshape the federal government through...