136 S. Ct. 1017 (2016)
V.L. and E.L. are two women who were in a relationship from approximately 1995 until 2011.1 Through assisted reproductive technology, E.L. gave birth to a child named S.L. in 2002 and to twins named N.L. and H.L. in 2004.2 After the children were born, V.L. and E.L. raised them together as joint parents.3
V.L. and E.L. eventually decided to give legal status to the relationship between V.L. and the children by having V.L. formally adopt them.4 To facilitate the adoption, the couple rented a house in Alpharetta, Georgia.5 V.L. then filed an adoption petition in the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia.6 E.L. also appeared in that proceeding. While not relinquishing her own parental rights, she gave her express consent to V.L.'s adoption of the children as a second parent.7 The Georgia court determined that V.L. had complied with the requirements of Georgia law for adoption. It entered a final decree of adoption allowing V.L. to adopt the children and recognizing both V.L. and E.L. as their legal parents.8
V.L. and E.L. ended their relationship in 2011, while living in Alabama, and V.L. moved out of the house that the couple had shared.9 V.L. later filed a petition in the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Alabama, alleging that E.L. had denied her access to the children and interfered with her ability to exercise her parental rights.10 She asked the Alabama court to register the Georgia adoption judgment and award her some measure of custody or visitation rights.11 The matter was transferred to the Family Court of Jefferson County. That court entered an order awarding V.L. scheduled visitation with the children.12
E.L. appealed the visitation order to the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals. She argued, among other points, that the Alabama courts should not recognize the Georgia judgment because the Georgia court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to enter it.13 The Court of Civil Appeals rejected that argument. It held, however, that the Alabama family court had erred by failing to conduct an evidentiary hearing before awarding V.L. visitation rights, and so it remanded for the family court to conduct that hearing.14 The Alabama Supreme Court reversed. It held that the Georgia court had no subject-matter jurisdiction under Georgia law to enter a judgment allowing V.L. to adopt the children while still recognizing E.L.'s parental rights.15
Whether the Full Faith and Credit Clause requires Alabama courts to recognize the Georgia adoption judgment?16
The Full Faith and Credit Clause requires each State to recognize and give effect to valid judgments rendered by the courts of its sister States.17 This obligation applies if the rendering court had adjudicatory authority over the subject matter and persons governed by the judgment.18 A final judgment from a court of general jurisdiction is presumed to rest on proper jurisdiction unless rebutted by extrinsic evidence or the record itself.19 A State may not refuse recognition merely because it disagrees with the judgment's reasoning or result.20 Statutory requirements that are mandatory but do not speak in jurisdictional terms address the merits rather than the court's power to decide the class of cases.21
Yes. The Georgia Superior Court of Fulton County possessed exclusive jurisdiction over all matters of adoption under Ga. Code Ann. § 19-8-2(a) when V.L. filed the petition there, E.L. consented to the adoption, and the court entered the final decree after finding compliance with Georgia law.22
The Alabama Supreme Court's conclusion that Ga. Code Ann. § 19-8-5(a) deprived the Georgia court of subject-matter jurisdiction fails because that statute supplies a rule of decision for granting relief in a particular case rather than defining the class of cases the court may hear.23 Neither the Georgia Supreme Court nor any Georgia appellate court has treated the provision as jurisdictional.24
The judgment appears regular on its face, triggering the presumption of jurisdiction that the Alabama courts did not rebut with any established Georgia law to the contrary.25
The Full Faith and Credit Clause therefore requires Alabama courts to recognize the Georgia adoption judgment, and the Alabama Supreme Court's refusal to do so was error.26