A. A., et al. v. Joshua Mast, et al.

In September 2019, an infant was orphaned during a U.S. military operation in Afghanistan. The Government of Afghanistan, the United States, and the International Committee of the Red Cross identified the child’s Afghan next of kin, and she was placed in petitioners’ care. Eighteen months later, after petitioners fled the Taliban and brought the child to the United States, she was taken from them by respondents. Petitioners have not seen her since. Unbeknownst to petitioners, respondents had months earlier convinced a Virginia state court to grant them an ex parte adoption order, unauthorized under Virginia law, by committing what the United States later called “a fraud on the court.” App.166a. Petitioners were given no notice or opportunity to be heard in those adoption proceedings, even though they had physical custody of the child and were lawfully raising her in Afghanistan at the time. Virginia trial and appellate courts unanimously held that the adoption order was null, void, and unenforceable. Yet, in a sharply divided 4-3 decision, the Virginia Supreme Court reversed. According to the majority, petitioners were not entitled to the most basic procedural protections under the Due Process Clause because they were not the child’s parents. The question presented is: Whether, or under what circumstances, a child’s nonparent caretakers have a cognizable liberty interest under the Due Process Clause entitling them to procedural due process before a court enters an adoption order permanently removing the child from their care.