Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/21-376_7l48.pdf
Page Number: 130

8 

HAALAND v. BRACKEEN 

ALITO, J., dissenting 

held  that  Congress  under  any  of  its  enumerated  powers 
may regulate the very nature of those relations or dictate
their  creation,  dissolution,  or  modification.    Nor  could  we 
and remain faithful to our founding.  “No one denies that 
the States, at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, 
possessed  full  power  over”  ordinary  family  relations;  and 
“the Constitution delegated no authority to the Government
of  the  United  States”  in  this  area.  Haddock  v.  Haddock, 
201 U. S. 562, 575 (1906).  It is a “most important aspect of 
our federalism” that “the domestic relations of husband and 
wife”—and parent and child—are “matters reserved to the 
States and do not belong to the United States.”  Williams v. 
North Carolina, 325 U. S. 226, 233 (1945) (internal quota-
tion marks and citation omitted).

As part of that reserved power, state courts have resolved
child custody matters arising among state citizens since the 
earliest days of the Nation.  See, e.g., Nickols v. Giles, 2 Root 
461, 461–462 (Conn. Super. Ct. 1796) (declining to remove 
daughter  from  mother’s  care);  Wright  v.  Wright,  2  Mass. 
109, 110–111 (1806) (awarding custody of child to mother 
following divorce); Commonwealth  v. Nutt, 1 Browne 143, 
145  (Pa.  Ct.  Common  Pleas  1810)  (assigning  custody  of
child to her sister).  Then, as now, state courts’ overriding
concern  was  the  best  interests  of  the  children.    See,  e.g., 
Commonwealth  v.  Addicks,  5  Binn.  520,  521  (Pa.  1813) 
(court’s “anxiety is principally directed” to the child’s wel-
fare); In re Waldron, 13 Johns. Cas. 418, 421 (N. Y. Sup. Ct.
1816)  (court  is  “principally  to  be  directed”  by  “the  benefit 
and  the  welfare”  of  the  child).    By  the  mid-19th  century,
States had begun enacting statutory adoption schemes, en-
forceable through state courts, “to provide for the welfare of
dependent children,” starting with Massachusetts in 1851.
S. Presser, The Historical Background of the American Law 
of Adoption, 11 J. Fam. L. 443, 453, 465 (1971) (Presser);
1851 Mass. Acts ch. 324.  Over the next 25 years, 23 other
States followed suit. Presser 465–466, and nn. 111, 112.  As