Turtletalk.files.wordpress.com



KEY:HISTORIC/LEGISLATIVE HISTORY; ICWA’S PURPOSE;POWER OF CONGRESS; EXISTING INDIAN FAMILY (EIF); BEST INTERESTS; TRIBAL PROCEDURAL INVOLVEMENT;PLACEMENT PREFERENCES;DEFINING TERMS UNDER ICWA BRIEFARGUMENT 1ARGUMENT 2ARGUMENT 3ARGUMENT 4ARGUMENT 5American Indian Affairs, National Congress of American Indians, National Indian Child Welfare Association, Indian Tribes, and Other Indian Organization: CLICK HERECongress held hearings in the 1970s in regard to a crisis in state child welfare and adoption systems - a crisis that resulted in large numbers of Indian children being separated from their parents, Tribes and extended families and placed with non-IndiansCongress responded to this crisis by enacting the Indian Child Welfare Act to establish minimum federal standards for the separation of Indian children from their families and to provide specific protections to Indian families and TribesFather is a “parent” within the meaning of ICWA and is entitled to invoke its protections against termination of parental rightsThe application of ICWA is not dependent upon prior custody of an Indian child by an Indian parent; the Act is triggered by an Indian child involved in a child custody proceeding and the existing Indian family exception (EIF) should be rejectedAdult Pre-ICWA Indian Adoptees: CLICK HEREICWA Is Designed To Prevent The Separation Of Indian Children From The Indian Community Through Various Child Placement Practices, Including Voluntary AdoptionICWA Protects The Best Interests Of Indian Children By Establishing Procedural And Substantive Safeguards That Properly Protect Their Connection To Indian TribesAmici's Pre-ICWA Adoption Experiences Demonstrate That Maintaining Tribal Ties Serves The Best Interests Of An Indian ChildCurrent and Former Members of Congress: Click HereCONGRESS ENACTED ICWA IN ORDER TO PRESERVE THE CONTINUED SOVEREIGN, POLITICAL EXISTENCE OF INDIAN TRIBESCONGRESS HAS THE EXCLUSIVE POWER TO LEGISLATE WITH RESPECT TO INDIAN TRIBESICWA FALLS WITHIN CONGRESS'S CONSTITUTIONAL POWER AND DOES NOT VIOLATE EQUAL PROTECTION PRINCIPLESCasey Family Programs, Child Welfare League of America, Children's Defense Fund, Donaldson Adoption Institute, North American Council on Adoptable Children, Voice for Adoption, and Twelve Other National Child Welfare Organizations:CLICK HERETHE BEST PRACTICES IN CHILD WELFARE OF ENSURING STRONG SAFEGUARDS BEFORE SEVERING A CHILD'S TIES TO AN ACKNOWLEDGED, INTERESTED, AND FIT PARENT ARE EMBODIED IN ICWAICWA REFLECTS CONGRESS'S JUDGMENT TO ADHERE TO BEST PRACTICES IN CHILD WELFARE, NOT AN INVALID PREFERENCESeminole Nation of Oklahoma:CLICK HEREHistorical FrameworkThe Policy Behind The Indian Child Welfare ActThe ICWA Provides the Necessary Mechanism to Ensure Indian Nation Involvement in State Court Child Custody ProceedingsInter Tribal Council of Arizona, Ak-Chin Indian Community, Colorado River Indian Tribes, Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation, Hopi Tribe, the Pascua Yaqui Tribe of Arizona, and Tohono O'odham Nation:CLICK HERETribal Participation is a Fundamental Aspect of ICWA and Should Be ProtectedAdopting the Existing Indian Family Doctrine, or a State Law Based Definition of “Parent,” Would Complicate Child Custody Proceedings, Interfere with the Tribes' Rights to Notice and Intervention, and Harm Indian ChildrenArizona, Alaska, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Oregon, Washington and Wisconsin:CLICK HEREThe Act Applies to Proceedings Involving an Indian Child Regardless of the Child's Membership in an “Existing Indian Family” or the Parent's Custodial StatusAllowing Unwed Fathers of Indian Children to Timely Acknowledge or Establish Paternity by Means Other than Strict Compliance with State Paternity Laws Comports with ICWA's Purpose and Objectives and Supports the States' Goal of Efficient and Stable Adoptions of Indian ChildrenMinnesota Department of Human Services and Minnesota Ombudsperson for American Indian Families:CLICK HERETHE INDIAN CHILD WELFARE ACTINDIAN CHILD WELFARE IN MINNESOTADHS AND THE OMBUDSPERSON ENCOURAGE THE COURT TO INTERPRET ICWA TO CONTINUE TO ALLOW MINNESOTA AGENCIES THE AUTHORITY TO EFFECTUATE ICWA'S GOALSThe Oklahoma Indian Child Welfare Association:CLICK HEREICWA Is Configured To Protect The Best Interests Of Indian Children And To Promote The Stability And Security Of Indian TribesTanana Chiefs Conference, Bristol Bay Native Association, Association of Village Council Presidents, Central Council of Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska, Aleutian Pribilof Islands Association, Native Village Of Barrow, and the Orutsaramiut Native Council:CLICK HEREThe Historical and Cultural Landscape in Alaska Is Unique, and Any Narrowing of ICWA Will Be Detrimental to Alaska Native ChildrenAlaska Courts Have Consistently Recognized That ICWA Is Meant to Promote Tribal Control Over Custody Decisions Involving Alaska Native ChildrenImportant Progress in Alaska TribalState Relations Would Be Undermined If This Court Accepts Petitioners' Arguments That ICWA Imposes Distinctions Based on Race and Residency on Tribal LandsWisconsin Tribes:CLICK HEREAGGRESSIVE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ICWA IS NECESSARY FOR THE CONTINUING EXISTENCE OF THE AMICIICWA'S LEGISLATIVE HISTORY DEMONSTRATES THAT CONGRESS CONSIDERED AND REJECTED THE “EXISTING INDIAN FAMILY” DOCTRINETHIS CASE ILLUSTRATES WHY CONGRESS ADOPTED THE PLACEMENT PREFERENCES IN SECTION 1915(a)The National Native American Bar Association:CLICK HEREThe Indian Child Welfare Act's singular purpose is to protect Tribes' sovereign interest in their citizensICWA's purpose to protect Tribes' interests in their children is distinct from individual parental interestsThe purported existing Indian family doctrine exception to ICWA conflicts with ICWA's purpose of protecting Tribes' independent sovereign interest in their citizensThe American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of South Carolina:CLICK HERETHE INDIAN CHILD WELFARE ACT IS A CONSTITUTIONALLY VALID EXERCISE OF CONGRESSIONAL POWER THAT ESTABLISHES ESSENTIAL SAFEGUARDS FOR INDIAN CHILDREN, PARENTS, AND TRIBESTHE ADOPTION DISPUTE REGARDING BABY GIRL FALLS SQUARELY WITHIN THE SCOPE OF CONGRESSIONAL CONCERNS THAT PROMPTED PASSAGE OF THE INDIAN CHILD WELFARE ACTNational Latina/o Psychological Association, Asian-American Psychological Association, Association of Black Psychologists, and Society of Indian Psychologists:CLICK HEREPsychological Considerations Must be Appropriately Evaluated to Successfully Determine Custody of a ChildThe Lower Court Properly Applied an Appropriate Best Interests Analysis Informed by the Cultural Priorities of ICWALower Sioux Indian Community, Bois Forte Band of Chippewa, Prairie Island Indian Community, Fond Du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, White Earth Band of Ojibwe, The Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, The Grand Portage Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, Upper Sioux Community, The Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe, The Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe, The Red Lake Nation, The Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, and The Indian Child Welfare Act Law Center:CLICK HEREICWA provides a platform of minimum standards upon which Minnesota works to protect the best interests of Indian children, their families, and their tribesBy following the plain language and policy of ICWA, Minnesota stakeholders have already resolved that ICWA applies regardless of state-law parenting rightsBy following the plain language and policy of ICWA, Minnesota stakeholders have, like most jurisdictions, rejected the “existing Indian family” exception as inconsistent with ICWAThe minimum federal protections of ICWA remain important to Indian children and Indian tribes in Minnesota and should be followedSeminole Tribe of Florida, et al.:CLICK HEREThe constitutionality of ICWA as applied in this case should be determined under this Court's precedents recognizing the wide breadth of Congress's constitutional Indian affairs powers, which account for equal protection limitationsBecause the application of ICWA by the South Carolina courts was based on the protection of tribal citizenship, not race, it met the Indian rational basis standard and fell within the core Congressional powers acknowledged even by the Petitioners and the GuardianThe restrictive threshold tests advanced by the Petitioners and Guardian to avoid the proper standard of review are not supported by lawThe threshold tests proposed by the Guardian and the Petitioners are fatally subjective and would force courts into a policymaking role properly reserved for CongressThe “Existing Indian Family” doctrine advanced by the Petitioners and the Guardian suffers from the same fatal flaws as their threshold tests for constitutionalitythe Hamline University School of Law Child Advocacy Clinic:CLICK HERETo Protect the Best Interests of Indian Children the Policy Goals of the ICWA Must be FollowedTo Protect the Best Interests of Indian Children, Guardians ad Litem Must Consider the Indian Child Welfare Act and the Unique Needs of Indian Children When Making Their Recommendations Regarding the Adoption or Permanent Placement of an Indian Child?The Honorable Abby Abinanti, Chief Justice of the Yurok Tribal Court:CLICK HEREThe Treatment of the California Tribal People by the Invaders Seared into the Fabric of our Relationship a Pervasive Ability for the Invaders and their Heirs to “See” Tribal People as Not as GoodHaving Survived Genocide in Tribal Homelands Across the Country, Tribal People Argue that this Court Must Not Cloak this Century's Desire for Tribal Children in False ClaimsReturning to the Time Before the Indian Child Welfare Act is to Weaken Our People, Our Nations, and to Place us at the Mercy of Those Who Have an Ongoing History of Justifying Kidnapping Our ChildrenThe Navajo Nation:CLICK HEREICWA HAS APPLIED SINCE THE CHILD'S BIRTH TO ANY MATTERS RESPECTING CHILD'S CUSTODY; AND THE FATHER'S PARENTAL RIGHTS REMAIN INTACT“ACKNOWLEDGMENT OR ESTABLISHMENT” OF “PATERNITY” TO DEFINE “PARENT” UNDER ICWA SHOULD BE DEFINED BY APPLICABLE TRIBAL LAW GOVERNING FAMILIAL RELATIONS, NOT STATE LAWTHE EIF DOCTRINE CONTRADICTS ICWAProfessors of Indian Law:CLICK HEREU.S. policy formerly favored removing Indian children from their families as a means of “civilizing” the IndiansU.S. policy formerly favored eradicating Indian tribes and Indian culture to facilitate the Indians' assimilationBecause Congress intended ICWA to put a stop to these practices, the statute was drafted so that it may be invoked by all parents, whether or not custodial63 California Indian Tribes:CLICK HEREThe History of the Treatment of California Tribes is Relevant to the Purpose and Implementation of the ICWAAltering the Scope of the ICWA Will Upset Settled California LawCalifornia Tribes and Counties Are Involved in Numerous Collaborative Efforts to Better Implement the ICWAThe United States:CLICK HEREICWA applies to this child custody proceedingFather is a “parent” under ICWASection 1912(d) barred termination of Father's parental rightsThe South Carolina Supreme Court misinterpreted Section 1912(f)Application of ICWA in this case presents no constitutional concerns ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download