Marine set to keep custody of Afghan war orphan after Supreme Court denial

The girl's Afghan relatives believed they were entitled to due process before a court permanently removed the child from their care in a controversial international adoption case.WASHINGTON (CN) — The Supreme Court declined to add a custody dispute over an Afghan war orphan to its docket on Monday, refusing to weigh in on whether a U.S. Marine’s adoption unlawfully removed the infant from the care of family members.The child, referred to as Baby Doe in court proceedings, was orphaned at 2 months old after her parents and five siblings were killed during a U.S. military operation in rural Afghanistan in September 2019. Baby Doe lived with her Afghan relatives until a Virginia court granted custody to Virginia-based U.S. Marine Corps attorney Joshua Mast and his wife, Stephanie.An Afghan couple accused the Masts of abducting the husband’s baby cousin, saying the family wasn’t given notice or opportunity to challenge the custody order. Despite the federal government’s claims that the Masts fraudulently obtained custody, Virginia’s high court affirmed the adoption, holding that final adoption orders couldn’t be challenged after six months.Baby Doe’s Afghan relatives urged the Supreme Court to intervene, warning that without the justices’ help they may never see the child again.“Every so often, a case comes along requiring this court’s intervention to correct an egregious miscarriage of justice — and to uphold the basic fairness and integrity of the American rule of law,” the Afghan relatives wrote. “This is such a case.”U.S. forces found Baby Doe in the rubble with a fractured skull and femur and severe burns, and transferred her to a nearby military hospital. Mast learned of Baby Doe when serving a short stint as an attorney in October and became concerned with the child’s well-being. By then, the U.S. Forces-Afghanistan had begun coordinating the child’s return to her uncle with help from the International Committee for the Red Cross and officials from the Afghan Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs.Despite being privy to family reunification efforts, Mast petitioned for custody of Baby Doe in the Fluvanna County Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court. Mast testified the child was stateless, the search for relatives was unsuccessful and the child was in urgent need of medical treatment.The court granted an emergency adoption order relying on Mast’s misrepresentations that the Afghan government did not want custody of the child or jurisdiction over the matter. The court believed Afghanistan would provide a waiver of the jurisdiction in a matter of days, but the Afghan government never planned on waiving its jurisdiction. Baby Doe stayed in the military hospital during this time, but the court granted Mast and his wife physical care and custody.At the Afghan government’s request, the U.S. planned to move the child to her uncle’s custody in early 2020. Mast moved for a restraining order to prevent the transfer but was found unlikely to succeed on the merits. Baby Doe was put under the care of her uncle, who transferred guardianship to his son and his wife.Mast didn’t give up and employed a fellow attorney practicing in Afghanistan to convince the family to send the child to the United States for medical treatment. After the Afghan government collapsed on Aug. 15, 2021, and following more than a year of communication, the couple agreed to come with the child to the United States.Upon arrival, Mast presented an Afghan passport for the baby with his last name on the document, and the Afghan couple soon lost their child, who began living with the Masts.In July 2024, the Court of Appeals of Virginia voided Mast’s adoption of Baby Doe, finding that the Marine was granted custody after misrepresenting facts to a local custody court. But the Virginia high court reversed.The Afghan couple argued no American court could constitutionally sever their relationship with the child, as they are the de facto parents, but the Virginia high court found that argument only applies to biological parents.Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads