has recognized the parental status of nonbiological partners even where the partners were un able, or did not choose, to adopt. V.C., 163 N.J. at 209 (biological mother ended relationship with same-sex partner just after parties discussed adoption). Amici for the ACLU, the Justice for Children Project, and the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers point out that the constitutional protections afforded to parent-child relationships extend to the child, protecting his or her right to maintain a relationship with a parent. Thus, they point out that recognition of a common-law de facto parentage cause of action would also recognize L.B.’s right to have a relationship with Carvin. See, e.g., Moore v. City of E. Cleveland, 431 U.S. 494, 504-05, 97 S. Ct. 1932, 52 L. Ed. 2d 531 (1977) (<HOLDING>); Quilloin v. Walcott, 434 U.S. 246, 255, 98 S.
recognizing that the united states constitution protects the sanctity of the family and the family tradition and that this tradition is not limited to nuclear families but includes entire families that share a household with parents and children recognizing that the harm suffered by family members in combination with other factors  would presumably only be persecution where  the applicant not only shares or is perceived to share the characteristic that motivated persecutors to harm the family members but was also within the zone of risk when the family member was harmed and suffered some continuing hardship after the incident holding the family court erred in failing to hold a mother in contempt after she refused visitation of the father with their children in contravention of family court orders holding that the bia correctly imputed a parents knowledge that she and her children were not eligible for entry to the united states to her children holding that the plaintiff must demonstrate that defendants contacts with the united states as a whole support the exercise of jurisdiction consistent with the constitution and laws of the united states