Two Motions for Partial Summary Judgment in Oglala Sioux Tribe v. Van Hunnik

Brief in Support of First Motion (July 2014)

Statement of Undisputed Facts (First Motion)

As a result of the fact that (a) Defendants allowed no testimony at 48-hour hearings, (b) Defendants allowed no cross-examination at 48-hour hearings, (c) often the only questions asked of the parents in a 48-hour hearing were for purposes of identification and to see if they understood their rights, and (d) Defendants never conducted the inquiries required by 25 U.S.C. § 1922, Defendants’ 48-hour hearings were completed rather quickly. Judging from the length of the transcripts that were produced, the average length of time it took to complete a 48-hour hearing, Plaintiffs estimate, was under four minutes. A number of these hearings appear to have been completed in about sixty seconds.

The brief goes on to describe the many, many individual hearings where children were kept in DSS care for 45 or 60 days with absolutely to no evidence or testimony as to why.

Due Process Motion (Second PSJ)

Due Process Undisputed Facts

3 thoughts on “Two Motions for Partial Summary Judgment in Oglala Sioux Tribe v. Van Hunnik

  1. James Rinkevich July 18, 2014 / 10:56 am

    I don’t think this is legal even without the ICWA as is appears to violate the InterAmerican treaty (aka the charter treaty of the OAS) which incorporates as a mandatory duty of all states that the rights in the associated human rights document (the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man) be ensured — not merely not abridged. And they were doing it to everyone, so they really should ask for a declaration of that so they can be enjoined for all people.

Comments are closed.