Opinion ID: 2109253
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: indian children welfare acts

Text: In 1978, Congress passed the Indian Child Welfare Act, 25 U.S.C. §§ 1901 et seq., which embodies specific congressional findings: (3) that there is no resource that is more vital to the continued existence and integrity of Indian tribes than their children and that the United States has a direct interest, as trustee, in protecting Indian children who are members of or are eligible for membership in an Indian tribe; (4) that an alarmingly high percentage of Indian families are broken up by the removal, often unwarranted, of their children from them by nontribal public and private agencies and that an alarmingly high percentage of such children are placed in non-Indian foster and adoptive homes and institutions; and (5) that the States, exercising their recognized jurisdiction over Indian child custody proceedings through administrative and judicial bodies, have often failed to recognize the essential tribal relations of Indian people and the cultural and social standards prevailing in Indian communities and families. 25 U.S.C. § 1901. ICWA contains an express congressional delcaration of policy: The Congress hereby declares that it is the policy of this Nation to protect the best interests of Indian children and to promote the stability and security of Indian tribes and families by the establishment of minimum Federal standards for the removal of Indian children from their families and the placement of such children in foster or adoptive homes which will reflect the unique values of Indian culture, and by providing for assistance to Indian tribes in the operation of child and family service programs. 25 U.S.C. § 1902. Under ICWA,  `Indian child' means any unmarried person who is under age eighteen and is either (a) a member of an Indian tribe or (b) is eligible for membership in an Indian tribe and is the biological child of a member of an Indian tribe. 25 U.S.C. § 1903(4).  `Indian tribe' means any Indian tribe, band, nation, or other organized group or community of Indians recognized as eligible for the services provided to Indians by the Secretary because of their status as Indians, including any Alaska Native village.... 25 U.S.C. § 1903(8). ICWA also provides: In any State court proceeding for the foster care placement of, or termination of parental rights to, an Indian child not domiciled or residing within the reservation of the Indian child's tribe, the court, in the absence of good cause to the contrary, shall transfer such proceeding to the jurisdiction of the tribe, absent objection by either parent, upon the petition of either parent or the Indian custodian or the Indian child's tribe: Provided, That such transfer shall be subject to declination by the tribal court of such tribe. 25 U.S.C. § 1911(b). In any State court proceeding for the foster care placement of, or termination of parental rights to, an Indian child, the Indian custodian of the child and the Indian child's tribe shall have a right to intervene at any point in the proceeding. 25 U.S.C. § 1911(c). Regarding evidence and the burden of persuasion ICWA states: No termination of parental rights may be ordered in such proceeding in the absence of a determination, supported by evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, including testimony of qualified expert witnesses, that the continued custody of the child by the parent or Indian custodian is likely to result in serious emotional or physical damage to the child. 25 U.S.C. § 1912(f). Pursuant to authority delegated by the Secretary of the Interior of the United States, the Bureau of Indian Affairs promulgated Guidelines for State Courts; Indian Child Custody Proceedings, 44 Fed. Reg. 67584 to 67595 (1979) (Guidelines). As noted in the Guidelines, through ICWA Congress has expressed a preference for keeping Indian families together, granting deference to tribal judgment on custody matters and child placement with Indian families when Indian children have been removed from their homes. In subpart (2) of the Policy section of the Guidelines, there is the following provision: In any child custody proceeding where applicable state or other federal law provides a higher standard of protection to the rights of the parent or Indian custodian than the protection accorded under the Indian Child Welfare Act, the state court shall apply the state or other federal law, provided that application of that law does not infringe any right accorded by the Indian Child Welfare Act to an Indian tribe or child. 44 Fed.Reg. at 67586. The Guidelines further provide: (a) When a state court has reason to believe a child in a custody proceeding is an Indian, the court shall seek verification of the child's status from either the Bureau of Indian Affairs or the child's tribe.... (b)(i) The determination by a tribe that a child is or is not a member of that tribe, is or is not eligible for membership in that tribe, or that the biological parent is or is not a member of that tribe is conclusive. .... (c) Circumstances under which a state court has reason to believe a child involved in a child custody proceeding is an Indian include ... (i) Any party to the case, Indian tribe, Indian organization or public or private agency informs the court that the child is an Indian child. Id. The commentary for the foregoing excerpt from the Guidelines states: This guideline makes clear that the best source of information on whether a particular child is Indian is the tribe itself. It is the tribe's prerogative to determine membership criteria and to decide who meets those criteria. Id. Section 43-1502 of the Nebraska Indian Child Welfare Act, enacted in 1985, expresses the purpose of the state act: The purpose of the Nebraska Indian Child Welfare Act is to clarify state policies and procedures regarding the implementation by the State of Nebraska of the Federal Indian Child Welfare Act, 25 U.S.C. 1901 et seq. It shall be the policy of the state to cooperate fully with Indian tribes in Nebraska in order to ensure that the intent and provisions of the Federal Indian Child Welfare Act are enforced. Sections 43-1503(4) (definitions for NICWA) and 43-1504(2) (jurisdiction and transfer of proceedings to a tribal court) are verbatim reiterations of their respective counterparts in the federal act, ICWA. Section 43-1505(6) of NICWA, as does § 1912(f) of ICWA, requires evidence beyond a reasonable doubt for termination of parental rights. In contrast with the reasonable doubt standard expressed in the Indian Child Welfare Act, the evidential standard for the burden of persuasion in termination of parental rights cases under the Nebraska Juvenile Code is clear and convincing evidence. In re Interest of J.S., A.C., and C.S., 227 Neb. 251, 417 N.W.2d 147 (1987).