2024 WI 18
Wis.2024Background
- A.M.B., the biological mother of M.M.C., petitioned the court to allow her nonmarital partner, T.G., to adopt her child in Wisconsin.
- The parental rights of M.M.C.'s biological father had been terminated, and T.G. had acted as M.M.C.'s father for over a decade.
- Wisconsin statutes permit stepparent adoption only if the adopting partner is married to the child's parent; the statutes do not allow a nonmarital partner to adopt without terminating the biological parent’s rights.
- The circuit court denied the adoption, citing statutory restrictions and an earlier Wisconsin Supreme Court precedent (Georgina G. v. Terry M.), despite finding the adoption in M.M.C.'s best interest.
- Petitioners challenged the statute on equal protection grounds under the Fourteenth Amendment, asserting unconstitutional discrimination based on marital status.
- The Wisconsin Supreme Court, on bypass from the Court of Appeals, reviewed the statutes' constitutionality facially (not as-applied).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Do Wisconsin’s adoption statutes violate Equal Protection? | Statutes arbitrarily deny adoption based on marital status; discriminates against children of single parents and unmarried partners. | Statutes rationally further state interests in child stability and marital families by limiting stepparent adoptions to spouses. | Statutory restrictions are constitutional; rational basis exists to promote stability via marital families. |
| Is strict scrutiny required (fundamental right/protected class)? | Adoption, or right to familial association, is a fundamental right and/or marital status deserves heightened protection. | Adoption is not a fundamental right; marital status is not a suspect class under Equal Protection. | Strict scrutiny does not apply; adoption not a fundamental right nor suspect class. |
| Is there a rational basis for limiting adoption to married stepparents? | No rational basis; statutes are arbitrary given single adults can adopt, but not unmarried partners. | State has legitimate reasons to prefer married couples for adoption—stability, financial security, permanent family units. | There is a rational basis for statutory distinction; statutes are upheld. |
| Should the Wisconsin Constitution be construed to grant broader rights than the federal Fourteenth Amendment? | Wisconsin’s Constitution should be interpreted independently and could afford broader rights. | Petition did not independently argue this; precedent generally treats state and federal clauses identically. | Court declines to address; no independent developed argument made under state constitution. |
Key Cases Cited
- Georgina G. v. Terry M., 184 Wis. 2d 492 (Wis. 1994) (upheld statutory adoption restrictions limiting eligibility to spouses, not unmarried partners)
- Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1967) (fundamental right to marry; not directly implicated here)
- Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644 (U.S. 2015) (states may continue to restrict marital-based rights if rational basis exists)
- Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (U.S. 2000) (parent’s fundamental liberty interest in the care, custody, and control of their children)