GOOD NEWS: 21 pro-ICWA Amicus Briefs

 

Amicus Briefs in Haaland v. Brackeen

Kate Fort Aug 21

We have a total of 21 pro-ICWA Amicus Briefs. Here they are in some rough categories and some VERY rough summaries. In writing this post, I became overwhelmed at this stunning array of briefs and support for ICWA.

Government Briefs

NARF's Tribal Government and Organizations Brief : this brief has the sign on of nearly 500 tribes and over 60 tribal organizations. It discusses ICWA as an exercise of the trust responsibility, and the political relationship of tribes.

Congressional Brief : 87 Members of Congress signed this brief defending ICWA in the four principle arguments in the case

State AG Brief : 23 states and the District of Columbia signed on to this brief, which highlights how ICWA allows and encourages tribal-state relations in the area of child welfare.

LA County Brief : from the county counsel at the largest child welfare system in the country, it discusses the importance of ICWA to LA County practice with a focus on relocation in particular

Semi-Party Brief

Bradshaw Brief : This brief is unique in that it primarily tells the story of Robyn Bradshaw, the grandmother who adopted her granddaughter who was the subject of the claims of the Cliffords, one of the three foster family plaintiffs in the case. Because the procedural posture of the case below, the Cliffords' narrative of facts was allowed to go unchecked throughout the life of the case until now.

How Child Welfare Works Briefs

Family Defenders : a brief from parent attorneys/family defenders in more than 8 states, this brief discusses the constitutional rights afforded to parents and families, how those intersect with the child welfare system, and the importance of ICWA in that structure. It directly addresses the arguments made by the other side regarding the child welfare system.

American Bar Association : This brief directly takes on the contention that child welfare is the sole province of the states as well as discussing the legal complexity of the child welfare system.

Casey Family Programs and 26 Other Child Welfare and Adoption Organizations : A continuation of the original, wildly successful, "gold standard" brief from Baby Girl, this brief focuses on child welfare best practices and how ICWA creates, promotes, and supports them.

National Association of Counsel for Children and 30 Other Children's Rights Organizations : In addition to discussion the Constitutional rights of families, this brief directly addresses how ICWA supports the best interests of children in state proceedings.

Former Foster Children : One of the briefs with a particular place in my heart, this brief allowed Native youth to tell their lived experience to the Court.

How Adoption Works Brief

Non-Native Adoptive Parents : while the plaintiffs in this case were not adoptive parents, this brief directly addresses how ICWA actually works in voluntary adoptions.

Law Professor Briefs

Ablavsky Brief : The originalism brief

Administrative and Constitutional Law Professors : this brief addresses three main issues--federal power, anti-commandeering, and delegation

Indian Law Professors : this brief focuses on the exclusive power of Congress to legislate on behalf of Indians as a political class

American Historical Association : this brief provides historical context, especially around the early efforts (or lack thereof) of state child welfare systems and Native children

Medical Organizations

American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Medical Association : ICWA works directly to address the attendant physical and emotional trauma of federal and state policies designed to destroy tribal families and extended tribal networks

American Psychological Association (specifically including the associations of Texas, Louisiana, and Indianan) and the Society of Indian Psychologists : The benefits for children of being parented by Indian adults

Interest Groups

ACLU : ICWA is not a race based law

Constitutional Accountability Center : Originalism and anti-commandeering

National Indigenous Women's Resource Center : The ramifications, specifically to VAWA, if "Indian" is a racial classification

Sen. Abourezk/Lakota People's Law Project : Passage of ICWA and issues in South Dakota

Lakota Child Rescue Project: SD violates ICWA each year

Archive photo

For 100 years, Native American children have been removed from their families. It began in the 1880s under a US government policy of assimilation: children as young as five were taken from their homes, shipped to boarding schools, and instructed in the ways of white culture. Today, a generation of children is once again losing its connection to its traditions. This time, it's through state-run foster care. Every year in South Dakota the state takes nearly 700 Native American children, when some 95% of them are placed in non-Native foster and state-run care—in direct violation of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA).
Why? Each year the state receives almost $100 million in federal money for foster care services.

Watch The Lakota Child Rescue Project -  on YouTube (Posted by Lakota Law)

http://www.youtube. com/watch? v=JDMiWmI_ bwE&feature= channel&list= UL

#####

Janice Howe receiving letters of support:
The response to Janice Howe's story on NPR was overwhelming. This video shows her receiving the first 1200 letters of support from around the country. Danny Sheehan, the chief counsel for Lakota People's Law Project personally delivered the letters.

http://www.youtube. com/watch? v=gji9F23ssUY

WE NEED YOU NOW! New Bill in WA state

IMPORTANT!! New WA bill for OBCs and Non-ID! 


Write these lawmakers! I did!



Penni writes on Soaring Angels:
Hello- We have a new bill this year that would release original birth certificates (OBC) to Washington State adoptees AND would also compel counties and adoption agencies to give out ALL possibly non-id (changes the 'shall' to 'will' in the non-id RCW - YAY!!).

This bill is House Bill 2211:
http://apps. leg.wa.gov/ billinfo/ summary.aspx? bill=2211

Because there are certain legislators who are extremely anti-open records, we did have to agree to a compromise this year. This compromise would add an option for birth parents to file an affidavit of non-closure, which would
mean the adoptee couldn't get their original birth certificate. 

The good thing about this particular compromise is that it would expire every 2 years and the birth parent would have to renew it. Also, even if a birth parent would file an affidavit of non-disclosure, the adoptee would
still be able to get their non-identifying information.

WHAT WE NEED FROM YOU:

1. CONTACT YOUR REPRESENTATIVE! 
We need all of you with a WA connection to contact your state representative and ask them to support House Bill 2211 (HB 2211). 

You can find your representatives here:
http://apps. leg.wa.gov/ DistrictFinder/ Default.aspx

2. IF YOUR REPRESENTATIVE IS ON THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, SETUP A MEETING!
If any of you live in a district with a representative on the House Judiciary Committee, and would be willing to set up a meeting, we could arrange to have someone from WA-CARE go with you to the meeting. 

Here are the members of the Judiciary Committee:
http://www.leg. wa.gov/House/ Committees/ JUDI/Pages/ MembersStaff. aspx. 

3. SETUP A MEETING WITH ONE OF THESE SENTATORS!
Do any of you live in the districts belonging to Sen. Becker, Sen. Keiser, Sen. Stevens, and Sen. Pridemore?? If yes, we also need to try to set up meetings with one of these sentators in the event that the bill passes the
house and moves on to the senate, need to find a potential senator to sponsor the bill.

For more information about the efforts in WA to get the adoption laws changed, see the WA-CARE website: http://wa-care.com/default. aspx

Next WA-CARE meeting: Wed, Jan 18, 2012, 11.30am at Cutter's Point Coffee, 5750 Ruddell Road SE, Lacey, WA.

Any comments or questions, please email WA-CARE at washingtonadopteerights@gmail. com
Thanks! Penni


From Trace: Write a letter to the legislators and email Penni and tell your story - good and bad - adoption secrecy is like a cancer and needs maximum exposure aimed at the lawmakers. The adoptee and their stories are critical to change these lawmakers minds.

TO:	Representative Tina Orwall
FROM:	Ms. Trace A DeMeyer
BILL:	2211 (For Adoptee Rights)
	Dear Rep Tina Orwall I did live and work in WA state for many years but currently live in MA. I am an adoptee and an author. My struggle to find my identity, my medical history, my ancestry, my family and my tribe is detailed in my memoir ONE SMALL SACRIFICE: Lost Children of the Indian Adoption Projects. My book is on Amazon. My blog (www.splitfeathers.blogspot.com) has research and history and many articles by and about adoptees who are also struggling with archaic laws. Not all have American Indian ancestry. Do you know who you are? Do you know what it is like not to know? Or date someone who could be your relative? Or get sick and not have medical history? Or have a fake birth certificate and now with the REAL ID ACT you may not be able to get a new drivers license or passport. My friends Wanda and Tom are WA state adoptees and cannot find their parents. Is that right? They are adults, not children. It's possible their parents are dead but they remember their siblings before they were taken to CT to be adopted. That was a part of the Indian Adoption Project. Excerpt from my second book SPLIT FEATHERS: TWO WORLDS Administered by the Child Welfare League of America and funded by a federal contract from the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the U.S. Children’s Bureau, the Indian Adoption Project lasted from 1958 through 1967. During an era when matching dominated adoption practice, it placed 395 Native American children from 16 western states with white families in Illinois, Indiana, New York, Massachusetts, Missouri, and other states in the East and Midwest. (Only 14 children were adopted by Southern families and one child was adopted in Puerto Rico.) Approximately fifty public and private adoption agencies cooperated with the project, but the largest number of children were placed by agencies that were leaders in African-American adoptions and services to children of color: Louise Wise Services and Spence-Chapin Adoption Services (both of New York) and the Children’s Bureau of Delaware. Because tribes are legally considered sovereign nations, the incorporation of Indian children into non-Indian families constituted a kind of international as well as transracial adoption...The Indian Adoption Project was perhaps the single most important exception to race-matching... It aspired to systematically place an entire child population across lines of nation, culture, and race. (85% of Indian children in 16 states were placed in CLOSED ADOPTIONS)(Each state had its own program after IAP using the ARENA projects which moved thousands of Indian children from Canada and the US to non-Indian adoptive families. I have more proof in book 2.) In the late 1960s and early 1970s, Native Americans challenged the idea that the Indian Adoption Project was a triumph and denounced the project as the most recent in a long line of genocidal policies toward native communities and cultures. In June 2001, Child Welfare League Executive Director Shay Bilchik legitimated Native concerns, formally apologizing for the Indian Adoption Project at a meeting of the National Indian Child Welfare Association. He put the Child Welfare League of America on record in support of the Indian Child Welfare Act. “No matter how well intentioned and how squarely in the mainstream this was at the time,” he said, “it was wrong; it was hurtful; and it reflected a kind of bias that surfaces feelings of shame.” Source: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~adoption/topics/IAP.html When you consider all the lies and secrecy and harm that surrounds adoption, how does that make you feel? Trace A. DeMeyer
RESPONSE:	Ms. DeMeyer has requested a response to this message.