Link to job announcement here.
Position closes: 08/24/16
Indian Child Welfare Attorney
This position represents the Chickasaw Nation in juvenile deprived cases arising under the Indian Child Welfare Act in both in-state and out-of-state courts. Extensive travel is involved. Working knowledge of the Indian Child Welfare Act, the Oklahoma Indian Child Welfare Act and courtroom experience are highly desirable.
Kristen Carpenter has published “Indian Status Is Not Racial: Understanding ICWA as a Matter of Law and Practice” as part of the CATO Unbound series on the Indian Child Welfare Act.
An excerpt:
On August 31, 2013, a little girl clad in a purple shawl, holding the hands of her father and stepmother, skipped into the grand entry of the Cherokee Nation’s annual powwow. An honored participant, the little girl followed in the steps of the Nation’s principal chief and first lady, and behind them a long line of Cherokees wearing U.S. military uniforms, tear dresses and ribbon shirts, buckskin, and jingle dresses fell into the circle. In brush arbors and bleachers, spectators visited with friends and relatives, and even deeper outside, the thick dark northeastern Oklahoma night, full and bright with crickets, stars, and spirits. At the very center of it all, the little girl smiled in the embrace of her Cherokee people. She danced in the heart of their landscape and in the landscape of their hearts.
Then the drum stopped, cameras flashed, and the little girl was whisked away to a tribal safe house. A contentious legal battle was being waged over her future, and there had been threats against her and her family. Beauty in a fade, to quote the immortal John Trudell.
Within weeks, the little girl, clutching a teddy bear, would be strapped into a car seat, and driven a thousand miles away from her family and home. The Supreme Court ruled the Indian Child Welfare Act did not apply, that her dad – her own loving biological Cherokee dad who had just served a tour of duty in Iraq and was adjudicated “fit” for parenthood – didn’t have a case for custody.[1] As a result, the little girl, like generations of Indian children before her, was taken from her Indian family. Taken away from her sister, cousins, grandparents and great-grandparents, away from her princess toys and pet geese, away from shell-shaker lessons and stomp grounds – to wake up and begin her life anew in a different home, with non-Indian adoptive parents. Across Indian Country, people prayed that she would survive this experience and promised to be there one day when hopefully she would return.
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.
Here is the opinion in Villarreal v. Villarreal (Tex. Ct. App.):
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.
Here are the materials in Pitre v. Shenandoah:
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.
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.
Here.
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.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.