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.
State’s (AG) Response to Tribe’s Pet for Rehearing
Earlier briefs on the rehearing petition are here.
The Alaska executive branch published emergency regulations addressing formal petitions for adoptions in cases involving Indian children: Emergency Regulations 7 AAC 54.600
Here is the draft state bill sent to the Legislature by the Governor: Draft Bill
These emergency regulations allow for a simple request by a relative, tribal member or other Indian family at any court hearing, or a request by the same conveyed to the department by phone, mail, fax, email or in person, or by the request of the child’s tribe on behalf of a relative or tribal member to constitute a proxy for a formal petition for adoption.
In addition, the Governor is holding a press conference on this today (10:30am/2:30pm EDT) :
MEDIA ADVISORY
Contact:
Grace Jang, Press Secretary – (907) 465-3976
Katie Marquette, Deputy Press Secretary – (907) 465-5801
Governor Walker to Hold News Conference Tomorrow
WHO: Governor Bill Walker, Lt. Governor Byron Mallott, DHSS Commissioner Val Davidson and Alaska Federation of Natives President Julie Kitka
WHAT: News conference to discuss Indian Child Welfare Act-related emergency regulations
WHEN: Thursday, April 16, 2015, 10:30 a.m. to 11:00 a.m.
WHERE: Governor’s Cabinet Room, Capitol Building, Juneau
TELECONFERENCE NUMBER: (800) 755-6634
LIVESTREAM: gov.alaska.gov/livestream<http://gov.alaska.gov/Walker/multimedia/livestream.html>
###
Here is the opinion in Native Village of Tununak v. State, Dep’t of Health & Social Services, Office of Children’s Services (Alaska).
An excerpt:
We asked the parties to provide supplemental briefing and oral argument on the effect of the Supreme Court’s Baby Girl decision on the adoption appeal currently before us.26 We now hold that because the United States Supreme Court’s decisions on issues of federal law bind state courts’ consideration of federal law issues — including the Indian Child Welfare Act — the decision in Baby Girl applies directly to the adoptive placement case on remand and to this adoption appeal. We discern no material factual differences between the Baby Girl case and this case, so we are unable to distinguish the holding in Baby Girl. Because the Supreme Court’s holding in Baby Girl is clear and not qualified in any material way, and because it is undisputed that Elise did not “formally [seek] to adopt” Dawn in the superior court, we conclude that, as in Baby Girl, “there simply is no ‘preference’ to apply[,] [as] no alternative party that is eligible to be preferred under § 1915(a) has come forward[,]” and therefore ICWA “§ 1915(a)’s [placement] preferences are inapplicable.”27 We affirm the superior court’s order granting the Smiths’ petition to adopt Dawn and vacate our remand order in Tununak I requiring the superior court to conduct further adoptive placement proceedings. We do not otherwise disturb our decision in Tununak I.
We posted briefs here.
Turtle Talk 