BLOGGER changed, not allowing us to UPDATE this back-up blog

(UPDATED 726/2025) issues with blogger are preventing this
Showing posts with label Brackeen v. Zinke. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Brackeen v. Zinke. Show all posts

Friday, February 22, 2019

Brackeen v. Bernhardt | National Native Organizations Respond

National Native Organizations Respond to Reply Briefs in Brackeen v. Bernhardt

Portland, Oregon

In reply briefs filed Tuesday with the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in the case Brackeen v. Bernhardt, the United States and defendant tribal nations reaffirm the constitutionality of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA).
The briefs also underscore why ICWA’s protections continue to be vital for Native children and families.
For over 40 years, ICWA has acknowledged the inherent right of tribal governments and the critical role they play to protect their member children and maintain the stability of families.
Brackeen v. Bernhardt is the lawsuit brought by Texas, Indiana, Louisiana, and individual plaintiffs, who allege ICWA—a federal statute that has been in effect for more than 40 years and has helped thousands of Native children maintain ties to their families and their tribes—is unconstitutional.
It is the first time that a state has sued the federal government over ICWA’s constitutionality. 
The lawsuit names various federal agencies and officials as defendants, and five tribal nations (Cherokee Nation, Morongo Band of Mission Indians, Navajo Nation, Oneida Nation, and Quinault Indian Nation) also have intervened as defendants. In addition, amicus briefs in support of ICWA were filed on behalf of 325 tribal nations, 21 states, several members of Congress, and dozens of Native organizations, child welfare organizations, and other allies.

The U.S. Constitution specifically gives Congress the power to legislate for the benefit of Native people and tribal nations. ICWA falls within that constitutional authority because it applies only to children who are either citizens (referred to as “members” in ICWA) of a federally recognized tribe, or who are both eligible for citizenship and the biological child of a tribal citizen parent. In addition, Congress has enacted laws concerning Native children from the earliest days of the United States government. ICWA provides a productive framework for states and tribal nations to partner in protecting the health and well-being of Native children.

There is a long history of Native children being removed from their families and communities without sufficient reason and often with little consideration of the rights of either the Native children or their families.

Before ICWA was enacted in 1978, as many as one out of every three Native children was removed from their home. ICWA has helped to reduce these alarming removal rates and helped more Native families stay together.  Child welfare research clearly shows that children are best served by preserving connections with their birth family and community.

Child welfare experts across the country are working together with tribes, states, and allies to continue implementing and protecting ICWA as the “gold standard” in child welfare law and ensuring Native children and families receive the services they deserve.


Striking down ICWA would not only be wrong as a matter of law; it also would have devastating real-world effects by harming Native children and undermining the ability of child welfare agencies and courts to serve their best interest.

Evidence shows that ICWA’s framework achieves better outcomes for children. National Native organizations stand with tribal nations and non-tribal ICWA allies to take action to protect ICWA and end the unnecessary removal of Native children from their families, tribes, and communities.

A copy of the reply brief of the Federal Defendants can be found here, a copy of the reply brief of the Intervening Tribes (Cherokee/Morongo/Oneida/Quinault) can be found here, a copy of the reply brief of the Navajo Nation can be found here.

A Court Battle Over a Dallas Toddler Could Decide the Future of Native American Law #ICWA



The federal lawsuit challenges a 1978 law that sought to reckon with America’s history of discriminating against Native Americans. Does it hold up 40 years later?

The Brackeens decided to fight the court’s ruling, which would send A.L.M. to an unrelated Navajo family (his biological mother is a member of the Navajo Nation) in New Mexico whom he had met once. They printed out the eight-page law and pored over it. They heard, on a foster-care podcast, about a lawyer who specialized in ICWA. After connecting with him, they soon had a powerful legal team comprising family attorneys and high-profile lawyers from a national firm. While Chad and Jennifer made their case in state court for adopting A.L.M., their lawyers sued the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Indian Affairs.

ICWA is one of the only parts of the foster-care system that actually works, argues Kathryn Fort, a Michigan State law professor and one of the nation’s foremost ICWA experts. Fort is one of the lawyers representing the tribes in the Brackeen case. “ICWA is trying to get better outcomes for a small group of children in a system that has just horrific outcomes,” she told me. White social workers often approach her at conferences to complain about the law in a way that plays on antiquated stereotypes about Native people. “I've had many social workers ask me about why we let ‘these people’ play their Indian card at the last minute,” she said. Fort is white; they assume, she said, that she’ll be on their side.

READ: The Indian Child Welfare Act's Uncertain Future - The Atlantic

Case by case, Goldwater is attempting to undo federal law.

Friday, January 18, 2019

Media Statements and News Articles on Fifth Circuit #ICWA Case

Quote from Intervening Tribes Statement:
We applaud the broad coalition of federal lawmakers, attorneys general from 21
states, and 30 child welfare organizations who have joined 325 Tribal governments and 57 Tribal organizations in filing numerous amicus briefs with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to defend the Constitutionality of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA).
The past 96 hours have witnessed an unprecedented and overwhelming demonstration of support for ICWA and its constitutionality as a wave of amicus briefs were filed urging the Fifth Circuit to reverse the district court’s ruling in Brackeen v. Zinke, which erroneously deemed key provisions of ICWA as being
unconstitutional.
Passed more than 40 years ago by Congress, ICWA was designed to reverse decades of cultural insensitivity and political bias that had resulted in one-third of all Indian children being forcibly removed by the government from their families, their tribes and their cultural heritage.
ICWA ensures the best interests and wellbeing of Native American children are protected. ICWA preserves the stability and cohesion of Tribal families, Tribal communities and Tribal cultures. It maintains and reinforces the political and cultural connections between an Indian child and his or her tribe.
 

Media Statements and News Articles on Fifth Circuit ICWA Case

by ilpc

Thursday, January 17, 2019

More than 280 Indian tribes and 50 tribal organizations have joined the tribal amicus brief Brackeen v. Zinke #ICWA

Photo of Idaho Attorney General Lawrence Wasden, authorization provided by the Idaho Attorney
General Office, 2019.


Published January 17, 2019
BOISE, Idaho — Idaho Attorney General Lawrence Wasden supports the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) by filing an amicus brief after meeting with tribal legal counsel from Idaho tribes.  On Thursday, January 10, 2018, at the Idaho Statehouse, legal counsel for the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes (Brandelle Whitworth), Coeur d’Alene Tribe (Eric VanOrden), Nez Perce Tribe (Darren Williams), and Kootenai Tribe of Idaho (William Barquin) met with Idaho Attorney General Lawrence Wasden and his senior staff to discuss the ICWA and the Brackeen v. Zinke case.
After the meeting and upon the request of his own staff, Mr. Wasden joined with the Attorneys General of Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Utah, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin in the bi-partisan group of states filing an amicus brief in defense of the ICWA.
Just last month, the Fort Hall Business Council authorized the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes to join the tribal amicus brief in BrackeenMore than 280 Indian tribes and 50 tribal organizations, including the Association on American Indian Affairs, the National Congress of American Indians, and the National Indian Child Welfare have joined the tribal amicus brief.
The Brackeen case involves a challenge by individual plaintiffs and the states of Texas, Louisiana, and Indiana to the constitutionality of the ICWA and its regulations.  In October 2018, a judge in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas ruled that much of the ICWA and its regulations were unconstitutional.  The case is currently on appeal to in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
A press release by California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and a copy of the states’ amicus brief may be found at https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-becerra-leads-bipartisan-coalition-21-attorneys-general-brief-0.

State of Idaho Attorney General Joins Indian Tribes in Defense of the Indian Child Welfare Act

by Native News Online Staff

click

Contact Trace

Name

Email *

Message *

NO MORE UPDATES

GO TO:  https://blog.americanindianadoptees.com/  for updates and news. THIS BLOG cannot be updated...