Monasky v. Taglieri
2020 United States Supreme Court case / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dear Wikiwand AI, let's keep it short by simply answering these key questions:
Can you list the top facts and stats about Monasky v. Taglieri?
Summarize this article for a 10 year old
Monasky v. Taglieri, 589 U.S. ___ (2020), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that a child's "habitual residence" under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction should be determined based on the totality of the circumstances specific to the case, and should not be based on categorial requirements (e.g. such as an agreement between the parents).[1]
Monasky v. Taglieri | |
---|---|
Argued December 11, 2019 Decided February 25, 2020 | |
Full case name | Michelle Monasky v. Domenico Taglieri |
Docket no. | 18-935 |
Citations | 589 U.S. (more) 140 S. Ct. 719; 206 L. Ed. 2d 9 |
Argument | Oral argument |
Case history | |
Prior | Motion for summary judgment denied, Taglieri v. Monasky, No. 1:15-cv-947, 2016 WL 8135530 (N.D. Ohio Jan. 25, 2016); judgment entered granting petition for removal, 2016 WL 10951269 (N.D. Ohio Sept. 14, 2016); affirmed, 876 F.3d 868 (6th Cir. 2017); on rehearing en banc, 907 F.3d 404 (6th Cir. 2018); cert. granted, 139 S. Ct. 2691 (2019). |
Holding | |
A child's "habitual residence" under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction should be determined based on the totality of the circumstances specific to the case, and should not be based on categorial requirements (e.g. such as an agreement between the parents). | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Ginsburg, joined by Roberts, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh; Thomas (Parts I, III, and IV) |
Concurrence | Thomas (in part and in the judgment) |
Concurrence | Alito (in part and in the judgment) |
Laws applied | |
Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction |
This case is notable as the fourth case heard by the Supreme Court concerning the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. Previously, this case was only the second Hague International Child Abduction case heard en banc in history (by the entire panel of judges because of its exceptional public importance) by a US Court of Appeals.[2]
Monasky was also the first case in which the United States Supreme Court substantively addressed the meaning of the definition of "habitual residence" as contemplated by The Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.[3]