In Quilloin v. Walcott et Vir, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a state law allowing adoption of a child by a stepfather without the biological father's consent did not violate the Due Process Clause or Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The case involved an unwed father who had never legitimized his relationship with his son nor taken on any significant responsibility for his upbringing and care. When the mother married another man, her husband sought to adopt her son without obtaining consent from Mr.Quilloin (the biological father). The court held that Georgia’s statute served legitimate state interests in protecting child welfare and preserving family unity while also respecting parental rights; it was designed to distinguish between fathers who have assumed responsibility for their children and those who have not.

In the dissenting opinion for Quilloin v. Walcott et vir, Justice Brennan argued that the majority's decision failed to adequately protect the rights of natural parents. He contended that a parent's desire for and right to "the companionship, care, custody, and management" of their child is an interest far more precious than any property right. Brennan emphasized that while state intervention may be necessary in cases where a parent is unfit or has abandoned their child, there was no such evidence in this case; instead it seemed as though Mr. Quilloin’s parental rights were terminated simply because it was deemed by Georgia law to be 'better' for his son to remain with his stepfather who had been acting as a father figure during Mr.Quilloin’s absence due to imprisonment rather than being returned back into his biological father's custody upon release from prison.