NICWA

DOJ Motion for Summary Judgment and National Orgs Amicus Brief Filed in Guidelines Litigation

September 21, 2015September 20, 2015Kate Fort

Latest filings in Nat’l Council for Adoption v. Jewell:

A favorite footnote (5 is good too):

10 Finally, BAF does not elaborate as to why placement with an Indian child’s family or tribe could not also be “loving,” and its silence is telling. ICWA was designed as a remedy for precisely this type of bias: the stereotype held by some child-welfare advocates that Indian children will be better off placed with a non-Indian family. See Miss. Band of Choctaw Indians v. Holyfield, 490 U.S. 30, 37 (reiterating that Congress feared that application of a “white, middleclass standard” will, “in many cases, foreclose[] placement with [an] Indian family”). BAF’s misguided view is, at best, an “abstract concern” that is insufficient to create standing. See Lane, 703 F.3d at 675 (citing Simon, 426 U.S. at 40).

National Organizations (NCAI, NICWA, AAIA) Amicus Brief in Support

Repost: National ICWA Attorney Survey

September 18, 2015September 18, 2015Kate Fort

Posting this one more time because it worked smashingly for a tribe yesterday. Fill it out! Forward it on!

In an attempt to better protect ICWA, tribes, and AI/AN families, NICWA and the ILPC have put together a short survey to collected ICWA attorney information nationwide. If you are in-house or outside counsel, if you are a parents’ attorney interested in taking ICWA cases, if you are legal aid agency who represents tribes, if you stumbled on this post and would be willing to represent a tribe from another state in an ICWA proceeding, please fill this out this poll.

The information will be sent to NICWA, and not sold or otherwise distributed beyond what is indicated. Please forward this questionnaire to the ICWA attorneys in your network and encourage them to submit their information as well.

Here is the link.

Survey of Tribal Child Welfare Codes by NNI and NICWA

July 9, 2015Kate Fort1 Comment

Poster version of the research here.

Placement Preference Case out of Nebraska Court of Appeals

June 10, 2015Kate Fort

Here.

In conclusion, we find that good cause exists for a deviation from statutory placement preferences under the ICWA and that the trial court did not err by denying the Tribe’s motion to change placement. Further, the record supports a showing by a preponderance of the evidence that active efforts were made by DHHS to prevent the breakup of the Native American family. Therefore, we affirm the order of the trial court.

The Court cited to the ’79 Guidelines and state law to find ICWA’s placement preferences do not require “strict placement,” but are a “statutory preference” to be allowed “absent good cause to the contrary.”

Written Comments on BIA Proposed ICWA Regulations Due May 19

May 1, 2015May 1, 2015Victoria Sweet

Written comments on the proposed ICWA federal rule are due by May 19. In order for this process to be effective, Tribes need to speak up as do individuals who have strong feelings about ICWA or have been impacted by ICWA compliance or lack of compliance. It matters how many written comments are received.

In order to assist, NICWA has put together several resources such as sample talking points and a sample comment letter. The NICWA resource page is available here.

Comments can be submitted via email, mail, or hand delivery.

Email: comments@bia.gov.
Include ‘‘ICWA’’ in the subject line of the message.
—
Mail or hand-delivery:
Ms. Elizabeth Appel, Office of Regulatory Affairs & Collaborative Action—Indian Affairs,
U.S. Department of the Interior, 1849 C Street NW., MS 364, Washington, DC 20240

(202) 273–4680

Previous coverage here.

The 1491s Are At NICWA

April 21, 2015April 22, 2015ilpc1 Comment

We are posting this picture very seriously, because Bobby says Turtle Talk is very serious.

L-R: Sheldon Spotted Elk (Casey), Erin Dougherty (NARF), Bobby Wilson (1491s), Victoria Sweet (NCJFCJ), Addie Smith (NICWA), Christina Snider (NCAI), Kate Fort (ILPC).