I have been following this case for a while, and found the USSC ruling interesting:
http://www.saveveronica.org/wp-content/ ... -FOR-V.pdf
(if this doesn't work, I'm sure you can get it from the USSC site as well)
Basically, it is the case of a biological father seeking to prevent adoption of his daughter; the biological mother consented to adoption (indeed sought it) after her relationship with the biological father dissolved. The federal jurisdiction arises because the child is a very small part native American, and certain statutes enacted in the early 20th century to prevent native american children being taken from their families and adopted (a practice said to be prevalent at that time "for the good of the children"). The case turned on whether the statute applied here, and the majority ruled that it did not because it was enacted to prevent the break up of families and the biological father never had a custodial relationship with his daughter. The concurrence of Thomas and the dissents are interesting because they reveal some Tof each justice's personality, but also how statutes are interpreted (see especially Sotomayor's dissent). The facts are fairly set forth in the opinions, as well, so the case can be readily understood. As you can see, it's not an easy decision.
Enjoy!