Adoptive Couple, Petitioners v. Baby Girl, a Minor Child Under the Age of Fourteen Years — Breyer, J…

Summary

Justice Breyer concurs with the Court’s opinion, emphasizing that the statute’s language does not clearly address absentee Indian fathers and that the Court should limit its decision to the issues presented. He notes the policy risk of excluding too many fathers, cautions against deciding broader questions not raised, and suggests that other statutory provisions might allow an absentee father to re‑enter the preference hierarchy. The opinion is joined by separate dissent and concurrence opinions that contest the majority’s statutory reading and raise constitutional concerns.