Which of the following qualifies as significant-connection jurisdiction?

Significant-connection jurisdiction allows a court to exercise jurisdiction based on a child's connection to a state, even if that state is not the child’s home state. When considering significant-connection jurisdiction, one important factor is whether there is no other state that has home-state jurisdiction. This is crucial because, under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA), if a home state does not exist, the court may establish jurisdiction based on significant connections relating to the child.

In this scenario, if no other state has home-state jurisdiction, the court may be empowered to assume jurisdiction because significant connections—such as where the child has been physically present, where evidence pertaining to the child is located, or other factors indicating a significant relationship to the state—can be demonstrated.

Choosing significant-connection jurisdiction opens up options for custody determinations by ensuring that cases can be managed in jurisdictions where the appropriate ties and evidence exist, thus promoting the child’s best interest and welfare. Other options might suggest residency requirements or the presence of both parents, which are not conditions for establishing significant-connection jurisdiction as per UCCJEA guidelines.