Well, Sirius is his legal guardian, and Remus is a distant relative, so they're mostly safe.
But there have been cases of biological relatives (grandparents, aunts and uncles) trying to get back kids who were *legally adopted*, which is more claim that Sirius has over Harry. Unless 'godfather' is more binding in the WW (and I do think there's canon support of that, the way the word is used in the books), I would think a judge would consider that the Dursleys -- who are closer relatives than either R or S and had Harry first and raised him from an infant -- are the more logical guardians. I don't believe a father's friend and his boyfriend would be able to advocate aginst that simply because Sirius was named in the Potters' will. (But it would help if R and S had something legally binding between them...)
Yeah, these are very in-the-background details, but it's the kind of life-stability attacks that gay couples who are responsible for a child have to protect themselves against.
no subject
Oh, right, didn't think of that.
Well, Sirius is his legal guardian, and Remus is a distant relative, so they're mostly safe.
But there have been cases of biological relatives (grandparents, aunts and uncles) trying to get back kids who were *legally adopted*, which is more claim that Sirius has over Harry. Unless 'godfather' is more binding in the WW (and I do think there's canon support of that, the way the word is used in the books), I would think a judge would consider that the Dursleys -- who are closer relatives than either R or S and had Harry first and raised him from an infant -- are the more logical guardians. I don't believe a father's friend and his boyfriend would be able to advocate aginst that simply because Sirius was named in the Potters' will. (But it would help if R and S had something legally binding between them...)
Yeah, these are very in-the-background details, but it's the kind of life-stability attacks that gay couples who are responsible for a child have to protect themselves against.