⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The Ninth Circuit hears a suit arising from Arizona's removal of twin boys D.K. and K.K. from their parents. In December 2018, six-year-old K.K. was hospitalized in life-threatening condition after a restricted diet; his twin D.K. was also severely malnourished. A juvenile court made the boys wards of the court, and the parents later stipulated to neglect. When the dependency case ended in November 2020, the father kept custody, the mother remained limited to supervised visits, and the state child-safety agency was discharged. The boys, through their mother, then pursued damages against caseworker Madison Bell for interfering with their family relationship and related state torts. The district court granted Bell summary judgment—judgment without a trial after finding no genuine dispute over a material fact. It found no evidence that Bell caused the separation or improperly controlled the juvenile judges. The boys will argue that Bell ignored changed circumstances and experts who favored loosening restrictions, leaving factual disputes for a jury. Bell will answer that the juvenile court controlled custody, independently reviewed the evidence, and repeatedly found the restrictions justified.

Kahraman v. State of Arizona (No. 25-4717) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued September 14, 2026.