× Thanks for reading! Log in to continue. Enjoy more articles by logging in or creating a free account. No credit card required. Log in Sign up {{featured_button_text}}

LINCOLN — The final word on this child custody dispute may come down to the meaning of the phrase “significant risk.”

Backstory first: A mother with custody of two young girls marries a man convicted of sexually assaulting a former stepdaughter. The father of the two girls asks the court to give him the kids and remove his children from what he calls a high-risk environment.

State law says a parent who lives with a sex offender convicted of assaulting a minor shall not be granted custody, unless the court finds there is “no significant risk to the child.” Both the trial judge and the Nebraska Court of Appeals ruled in the mother’s favor and left the girls in the home, ultimately finding the girls were not at significant risk.

All of which explains why the father turned Wednesday to the Nebraska Supreme Court.

During oral arguments, questions from the bench focused on what the Legislature meant by “significant risk.” Supreme Court Judge William Cassel asked the mother’s lawyer how he would interpret the phrase.

“Because I think among the public at large, their expectation would be: conviction, that’s it. No visitation now or forever,” Cassel said.