[Dimensio]

Judge Fox's ruling was based in part on the fact that the DHS was not given the authority to "regulate morality". That means that he found that the department that made the policy exceeded their authority when making it. He did not rule that the state cannot regulate morality, which means that if the law were written by the state, he would not have been able to use "regulating morality" as a basis for his ruling. Of course, facts seem to be uncomfortable when trying to support indefensible positions such as the now overturned regulation, so I'm not surprised to see so many people claiming that the ruling said something that it did not.

[goldstategop]

Then the State Legislature should rewrite the law. I still dislike judges substituting their own views for the general beliefs of society just to placate the pleadings of special interest groups.

[TheBattman]

WRONG! DHS can make rules based upon morality. They constantly choose to remove children from homes with abusive, drug addicted, alcoholic, etc. parents. They also won't (if they know about it) place children in homes with the above.

DHS does have authority to determine if a home is suitable and in the child's best interests. There are a lot of subjective factors considered.