Court Opinion

ID: 9809075
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 21:00:26.33186+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:24:46.969152
License: Public Domain

GUIDRY, J.,
additionally concurs and assigns reasons.
| fudges are bound by oath to follow the law regardless of our personal opinions, and we insist that everyone appearing before us do the same. The dissenting opinion suggests we should not follow the holding of the Supreme Court of the United States. However, it cites no legal authority. It cannot, because there is none to support its position. I am bound by my oath as an elected justice of this state to abide by the rule of law.
I must also respond to the dissenting opinion’s assertion that the “most troubling prospect of same sex marriage is the adoption by same sex partners of a young child of the same sex.” The dissenting opinion appears to be unaware of the facts of the case before us, which involves the intra-family adoption of a boy by the fe*624male spouse of the boy’s biological mother. See In re Adoption of N.B., 14-314 (La.App. 3 Cir. 6/11/14), 140 So.3d 1263. In any event, the dissenting opinion cites no legal or scientific authority, nor does the record contain any evidence, that would support its insinuation.