Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/21-376_7l48.pdf
Page Number: 30.0

22 

HAALAND v. BRACKEEN 

Opinion of the Court 

which only the State can rescue a child from neglectful par-
ents.  But §1912 applies to more than child neglect—for in-
stance, it applies when a biological mother arranges for a 
private  adoption  without  the  biological  father’s  consent. 
See, e.g., Adoptive Couple, 570 U. S., at 643–644.  And even 
when a child is trapped in an abusive home, the State is not 
necessarily  the  only  option  for  rescue—for  instance,  a 
grandmother can seek guardianship of a grandchild whose 
parents are failing to care for her.  See, e.g., In re Guardi-
anship of Eliza W., 304 Neb., at 996–997, 938 N. W. 2d, at 
309–310.  Petitioners do not distinguish between these var-
ied situations, much less isolate a domain in which only the 
State  can  act.    Some  amici  assert  that,  at  the  very  least, 
removing children from imminent danger in the home falls
exclusively to the government.  Brief for Academy of Adop-
tion  and  Assisted  Reproduction  Attorneys  et  al.  as  Amici 
Curiae 14 (“Amici are aware of no state in which a private 
actor may lawfully remove a child from his existing home”).
Maybe so—but that does not help petitioners’ commandeer-
ing argument, because the “active efforts” requirement does
not  apply  to  emergency  removals.  §1922.  If  ICWA  com-
mandeers state performance of a “core sovereign function,” 
petitioners do not give us the details.

When a federal statute applies on its face to both private
and  state  actors,  a  commandeering  argument  is  a  heavy 
lift—and petitioners have not pulled it off.  Both state and 
private  actors  initiate  involuntary  proceedings.    And,  if 
there is a core of involuntary proceedings committed exclu-
sively to the sovereign, Texas neither identifies its contours 
nor explains what §1912(d) requires of a State in that con-
text.  Petitioners have therefore failed to show that the “ac-
tive  efforts”  requirement  commands  the  States  to  deploy 
their executive or legislative power to implement federal In-
dian policy.

As  for  petitioners’  challenges  to  other  provisions  of