Author: Kate E. Fort

Colorado Court of Appeals ICWA Notice Case

Kate Fort

Here.

The 2016 Guidelines recommend that if only the tribal ancestral group is indicated, then the Department should notify each of the tribes in that ancestral group to identify whether the parent or child is a member of any such tribe. 2016 Guidelines at 18. Thus, because ICWA’s intent is to provide notice to tribes so that the tribes themselves can decide whether children are tribal members, see B.H., 138 P.3d at 303-04, when a parent is unable to provide detailed information on potential tribal affiliations, the Department should provide notice to all identified tribes and the tribes that have been historically affiliated with those identified tribes, see Tribal Agents by Affiliation, https://perma.cc/K3DDKQR5.

ICWA Case Out of Alaska Supreme Court

Kate Fort

Here.

Parents appeal from a superior court’s order that the Office of Children’s Services (OCS) had satisfied the Indian Child Welfare Act’s (ICWA) requirements authorizing the removal of their daughter, an Indian child, from their custody. Because
the court relied on information that was not in evidence to make the required ICWA removal findings, we vacate the order authorizing removal.

Bill to Allow Tribes Access to Information Needed for Active Efforts in Passes in Michigan

Kate Fort

Here is SB 616.

Here is the press release.

Here is some news coverage.

This bill was driven entirely by the tribes in Michigan–especially the in-house ICWA attorneys and tribal social workers who have been expressing concern with not getting enough information to ensure a family is receiving active efforts prior to a foster care placement.

Supreme Court Affirms Dismissal of Suit in Patchak v. Zinke

Kate Fort2 Comments

Opinion here.

THOMAS, J., announced the judgment of the Court and delivered an opinion, in which BREYER, ALITO, and KAGAN, JJ., joined. BREYER, J., filed a concurring opinion. GINSBURG, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which SOTOMAYOR, J., joined. SOTOMAYOR, J., filed an
opinion concurring in the judgment. ROBERTS, C. J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which KENNEDY and GORSUCH, JJ., joined.

***

Petitioner, David Patchak, sued the Secretary of the
Interior for taking land into trust on behalf of an Indian
Tribe. While his suit was pending in the District Court,
Congress enacted the Gun Lake Trust Land Reaffirmation
Act (Gun Lake Act or Act), Pub. L. 113–179, 128 Stat.
1913, which provides that suits relating to the land “shall
not be filed or maintained in a Federal court and shall be
promptly dismissed.” Patchak contends that, in enacting
this statute, Congress impermissibly infringed the judicial
power that Article III of the Constitution vests exclusively
in the Judicial Branch. Because we disagree, we affirm
the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit.

Previous posts here.

Program Coordinator Job for NAICJA

Kate Fort1 Comment

JD preferred job, hiring now–Program Coordinator Position Announcement

Supreme Court Cert Stage Briefing in R.K.B. v. E.T.

Kate Fort

As a reminder, this is the cert petition regarding the very long Utah Supreme Court decision which held there is a federal reasonableness standard for determining whether an unwed father is a parent under ICWA. That decision is here.

Another reminder–there are generally no cert stage amicus briefs filed in opposition to a cert petition. And a cert petition is just asking the Supreme Court to take the case. It doesn’t mean the Court has taken the case.

RKB Petition for Certiorari

R.K.B. NCFA Amicus ISO Cert Final

R.K.B. v. E.T. FINAL AMICUS BRIEF AAAA

Amicus Brief- Utah Adoption Council

Amicus Curiae Brief Goldwater

R.K.B v. E.T. Brief in Opposition

Eighth Circuit Oglala Sioux ICWA Case Oral Arguments

Kate Fort

Here.

News coverage here.

Ninth Circuit Briefing in A.D. v. Washburn (Tahsuda)(Goldwater Case)

Kate Fort

This is the appeal of the dismissal of the case in the federal District of Arizona purporting to represent all Native children in foster care in Arizona and their non-Indian foster parents or adoptive placements. The Goldwater Institute appealed the dismissal ot the Ninth Circuit.

20_Opening Brief_09-01-2017

40_AZResponse

41_GilaNavajoResponse

42_USResponse

53 – Goldwater Reply Brief

 

 

 

Draft Guidance on the Native American Children’s Safety Act

Kate Fort

Here is the Dear Tribal Leader letter, the guidance, and the request for comments on it:  Draft Guidance for NACSA

This bill and guidance puts certain requirements on tribes, tribal courts, and tribal social service agencies regarding foster care placements and background checks. There have been concerns about the feasibility of the requirements, primarily related to tribal access to individual state databases for the required checks. Here are the important listening session and comment dates (I have to assume that’s March 16, 2018, not 2017 for the written comment deadline):