Parental rights and custody
E. R. v. New Jersey Division of Child Protection and Permanency
In brief
- Where it stands
- Dismissed
Petition denied.
- What it’s about
- E.R., a father, asked the Supreme Court to review whether New Jersey could withhold custody without first showing he was unfit, then rely on the resulting lack of a parent-child relationship to seek termination of his parental rights.
- Who it affects
- The order did not decide whether New Jersey could rely on an absent parent-child relationship when seeking to end E.R.'s parental rights.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The Court refused to hear the case (denied review) and did not decide that question.
E.R.'s challenge concerned the Due Process Clause and a Supreme Court precedent recognizing a presumption that parents are fit.
Question presented
Whether the Due Process Clause permits a State to withhold custody of a child from a previously non-custodial parent without first overcoming the presumption of fitness recognized in Stanley v. Illinois, 405 U.S. 645 (1972) and then rely upon the absence of a parent-child relationship resulting from that denial of custody and State-imposed conditions on visitation as grounds to terminate parental rights?
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Show 1 moreShow fewer
Brief added: Petition
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.