This sounds like a case where the judge has ruled that the state law in not based in logic (at least in her view and some of the expert witnesses) and thus not valid. It would seem to me in adoption cases, the state has loco parentis rights and, in the judgment of the legislature and executive branch, these children are best raised with heterosexual parents. With this reasoning, a judge can supplant any parental decision based on the court’s interpretation of what is in the child’s interest. It would seem to me that a state can pass laws based on “because we want to” and not have to scientifically justify each law.
“...a judge can supplant any parental decision based on the court’s interpretation of what is in the child’s interest...”
Welcome to reality... This is the “justice” dished out to fathers in custody cases every day in this country.