Legal Opinion

Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided June 25, 2013No. 12-399Published

1Dissent · ScaliaJustice Scalia

I join Justice SOTOMAYOR's dissent except as to one detail. I reject the conclusion that the Court draws from the words "continued custody" in 25 U.S. C § 1912(f) not because *668"literalness may strangle meaning," see post, at 2577, but because there is no reason that "continued" must refer to custody in the past rather than custody in the future. I read the provision as requiring the court to satisfy itself (beyond a reasonable doubt) *2572not merely that initial or temporary custody is not "likely to result in serious emotional or physical damage to the child," but that continued custody is not…

Also in this document: Dissent · Sotomayor.

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Santosky v. KramerSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. Troxel v. GranvilleSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  3. Robinson v. Shell Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1997
  4. United Sav. Assn. of Tex. v. Timbers of Inwood Forest Associates, Ltd.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
  5. Morton v. MancariSupreme Court of the United States · 1974

24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API