Volume
74
Abstract
When a child’s legal age can be judicially reclassified without rigorous procedural safeguards, the foundations of American due process erode. This article explores the alarming constitutional vacuum exposed by the case of Natalia Grace, an adopted Ukrainian child whose age was legally reclassified from eight to twenty-two without procedural safeguards such as a hearing, legal counsel, or evidentiary testing. Unlike competency or parental rights proceedings, re-aging decisions lack uniform standards, judicial transparency, or appellate recourse. This article argues that re-aging implicates fundamental liberty interests and must be governed by heightened due process protections. Drawing on comparative models from guardianship and competency law, the article proposes a statutory framework requiring clear evidentiary thresholds, multidisciplinary assessment, appointment of a guardian ad litem, and mandatory appellate review. With implications spanning juvenile justice, immigration, disability, and evidentiary law, the article calls for urgent legislative reform to ensure that identity-based adjudications meet constitutional standards and protect the most vulnerable.
Recommended Citation
Lauren Gay,
What's My Age Again? The Curious Case of Natalia Grace and the Constitutional Void in Re-Aging Law,
74 Clev. St. L. Rev. Et Cetera
1
(2025)
available at https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/etcetera/vol74/iss1/1