Fletcher on ICWA at Cato Unbound

Here is “Limit Government Intrusion in Indian Families’ Lives.” This essay is part of a series of online essays at Cato Unbound on the Indian Child Welfare Act.

Excerpts:

The Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) restricts government intervention in Indian families’ lives, imposes important obligations on the government that benefit both children and parents when it does interfere, and limits the ease by which private entities profit from government action.

And:

Alexandria P. is a story of how foster parents created an adversarial relationship with a child’s family, disregarding the goal of reunification, and then created a perfect storm of anti-Indian media sentiment when they lost. Some facts should be made clear, in case they are not: Lexi knew and regularly visited her Utah family – her sisters and her aunt and uncle – and she always knew she was a foster child. From the beginning, the California foster couple was the only party to contest Lexi’s placement with her relatives. The state of California, the Choctaw Nation, her relatives, her father, and Lexi’s own counsel all agreed that the placement with her relatives was absolutely in her best interest. Not once did any court disagree.

Finally:

Casual racism against American Indians is alive and well. In this hostile racial climate, it shouldn’t be surprising that Indian parents in South Dakota argue that “there’s this collective belief that Native people can’t take care of their own children.” The critique that ICWA improperly routes Indian children to their relatives’ homes instead of non-Indian homes is a critique that takes advantage of racial animus against Indian people and comes dangerously close to an allegation that Indian parents and tribal communities are inherently inferior (others have outright denounced the Goldwater Institute’s goals for this reason). Indian people love their children the same as everyone else. ICWA, the gold standard in child welfare, is there to support Indian families against governments that too often devalue them.

Texas COA Reinstates State Court Jurisdiction over Indian Child Custody Dispute

Here is the opinion in Villarreal v. Villarreal (Tex. Ct. App.):

Opinion

Article on California’s Report on ICWA (non) Compliance

Report: Compliance with Indian Child Welfare Act Spotty

The report found that state and local agencies still struggle with the law, according to Kimberly Cluff, a task force member and staff member of the Morongo Band of Mission Indians. She said the tribes feel like they’re at “ground zero.”

“The law provides the tribes and, more importantly, tribal children with a bunch of rights, but if the tribe doesn’t know the child is in foster care, or if nobody asks the question of family tribal status, then all those protections are lost,” Cluff said. “If we don’t know that child is an Indian, we can’t protect them as an Indian and it’s just somewhat shocking that 40 years after the passing of this law, we’re still talking about basic implementation.”

A copy of the Report is here.

Second Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Federal Court Challenge to Onondaga Nation’s ICWA Jurisdiction

Here are the materials in Pitre v. Shenandoah:

Pitre2ndCir2-18-16

Appellant Brief

Onondaga Brief

Onondaga County Brief

Oswego County Brief

Reply Brief

AK Bill Designed to Address Tununak ICWA Case Signed into Law by Governor Walker

Press Release here.

House Bill 200 was sponsored by Governor Walker, working in close collaboration with the Alaska Federation of Natives and Tribes. The bill is designed to correct and minimize recent legal barriers that were put in place for families interested in adopting Alaska Native children following the U.S Supreme Court Baby Girl Veronica decision and the Tununak litigation in the Alaska Supreme Court.

Bill here.

Oral Arguments in Gila River Indian Community v. Dept. of Child Safety et al

One of the children in this case was originally the named plaintiff in A.D. v. Washburn (also called Carter v. Washburn, or the Goldwater litigation). Goldwater is representing the foster parents in this case, now in state court. Tom Murphy, in-house at GRIC, is doing the oral argument for the tribe here.

Judge Ron Whitener and Kate Fort Presentations at NCJFCJ Annual Conference

Judge Ron Whitener, Chief Judge of the Tulalip Tribal Court, was the first ever Native plenary speaker at NCJFCJ’s Annual Conference. He gave a presentation entitled “How State and Tribal Court Judges Can Work Together to Improve Outcomes.” Judge Whitener’s presentation was very well-received by the judges, and he received a standing ovation from the audience.

In addition, Kate Fort presented a well-attended session entitled “What State Court Judges Need to Know About ICWA.” Kate gave a brief update on recent court activity around ICWA and then summarized some key provisions in the new ICWA regulations. The judges were thrilled to receive this brand new and important information.

Thanks to both of them for their contributions to the conference and to NCJFCJ for its continuing commitment to tribal courts, tribal issues, and tribal-state collaborations.

IMG_4492

California Supreme Court Case on Active Efforts and Tribal Membership

Here.

The Court held this court rule to be invalid:

The rule provides: “If after notice has been provided as required by federal and state law a tribe responds indicating that the child is eligible for membership if certain steps are followed, the court must proceed as if the child is an Indian child and direct the appropriate individual or agency to provide active efforts under rule 5.484(c) to secure tribal membership for the child.” (Rule 5.482(c), italics added.) We conclude the rule is invalid as a matter of state law.

But this rule to be valid:

Rule 5.484(c)(2) provides: “In addition to any other required findings to place an Indian child with someone other than a parent or Indian custodian, or to terminate parental rights, the court must find that active efforts have been made . . . to provide remedial services and rehabilitative programs designed to prevent the breakup of the Indian family, and must find that these efforts were unsuccessful. [¶] . . . [¶] (2) Efforts to provide services must include pursuit of any steps necessary to secure tribal membership for a child if the child is eligible for membership in a given tribe, as well as attempts to use the available resources of extended family members, the tribe, tribal and other Indian social service agencies, and individual Indian caregivers.”

 

ICWA Director Vacancy with Association of Village Council Presidents

Link to job site here.

The ICWA Director is responsible for the overall operations of the ICWA department and personnel. It includes supervision of the ICWA Program involving case management oversight entered into on behalf of the compacted villages in the AVCP region.