Whether the Fourth Circuit's decision improperly wrote out the Article 3 requirement of the Hague Child Abduction Convention that a parental agreement have legal effect under the substantive law of the child's habitual residence in order to impact a parent's rights of custody under the treaty

QUESTION PRESENTED Article 3 of the Hague Child Abduction Convention requires that a parental agreement have legal effect under the substantive law of the country of the child’s habitual residence in order to impact a parent’s rights of custody under the treaty. Did the Fourth Circuit’s decision write that article 3 requirement out of the Hague Child Abduction Convention?