Source: http://narf.org/icwa/federal/usca/1918.htm
Timestamp: 2014-04-24 10:57:28
Document Index: 191175172

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1918', '§ 108', '§ 1727', '§ 13', '§ 46', '§ 46', '§ 46', '§ 1918', '§ 1918']

25 U.S.C.A. § 1918
CREDIT(S) (Pub.L. 95-608, Title I, § 108, Nov. 8, 1978, 92 Stat. 3074).
The Act of Aug. 15, 1953, referred to in subsec. (a), is Act Aug. 15, 1953, c. 505, 67 Stat. 588, as amended, which enacted section 1162 of Title 18, Crimes and Criminal Procedure, and section 1360 of Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure, and provisions set out as notes under section 1360 of Title 28. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Tables.
CROSS REFERENCES Approval, consideration, or determination of petition for assumption of jurisdiction over child custody proceedings by Passamaquoddy Tribe or Penobscot Nation according to this section, see 25 USCA § 1727.
CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS Procedures governing tribal reassumption of jurisdiction over Indian child custody proceedings, see 25 CFR § 13.1 et seq.
LAW REVIEW COMMENTARIES Fighting over Indian children: The uses and abuses of jurisdictional ambiguity. Barbara Ann Atwood, 36 UCLA L.Rev. 1051 (1989).
Tribal court jurisdiction over civil disputes involving non-Indians: An assessment of National Farmers Union Insurance Cos. v. Crow Tribe of Indians and a proposal for reform. 20 U.Mich.J.L.Ref. 217 (1986).
Federal Procedure, Lawyers Edition § 46:479, Generally.
Federal Procedure, Lawyers Edition § 46:485, Approval.
Federal Procedure, Lawyers Edition § 46:486, Disapproval.
NOTES OF DECISIONS State regulation or control 1
Tribal jurisdiction 2
1. State regulation or control
Indian village had no jurisdiction to decide child custody matters of its Indian children where the village had not successfully petitioned Secretary of Interior to reassume jurisdiction. Matter of F.P., Alaska 1992, 843 P.2d 1214, certiorari denied 113 S.Ct. 2441, 508 U.S. 950, 124 L.Ed.2d 659. Indians 6.6(2)
Indian Child Welfare Act gives certain states exclusive jurisdiction over matters involving custody of Indian children and requires an Indian tribe petition to United States Department of the Interior for approval of its plan for the handling of child custody proceedings before it may reassume jurisdiction over such matters. Native Village of Nenana v. State, Dept. of Health & Social Services, Alaska 1986, 722 P.2d 219, certiorari denied 107 S.Ct. 649, 479 U.S. 1008, 93 L.Ed.2d 704. Indians 6.6(2)
Alaska native villages were entitled to exercise concurrent jurisdiction with state over child custody determinations, requiring Alaska to give full faith and credit to tribal court adoption decrees under Indian Child Welfare Act, to extent that villages were modern-day successors to historical sovereign bands of native Americans. Native Village of Venetie I.R.A. Council v. State of Alaska, C.A.9 (Alaska) 1991, 944 F.2d 548, rehearing denied, on remand. Indians 6.10
25 U.S.C.A. § 1918, 25 USCA § 1918