I think the situation here is that California requires protection for the child by both parents, and anyone else who claims guardianship of the child (like a step-parent) sign a release form.
In most of the world, indicating that one of the intended signers is deceased would be enough, but California probably requires an official certification of death.
But this was still handled in a ridiculous manner. All the judge had to say was “We’re all set. Just need to have the death certificate sent to us for the father and we have no problems.” rather than “You need to prove he’s dead.”
I’m not really sure that’s what the judge said. I think that’s the headline writer trolling for hits. All we get in the story that comes straight from the judge is that they are unable to find the contract to be in the best interest of the minor until conditions that TMZ carefully didn’t bother to quote are met. I bet if we actually got the whole quote it would be a bland perfectly reasonable request for a death certificate.
Is this a California judge or an Australian judge? Isn’t she an Australian citizen?