Opinion ID: 2747286
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Congress has Already Spoken to an I an Child's

Text: Best Interests in Jurisdictional Scheme To extent a best interests consideration is relevant, it has already been decided by Congress enacting the ICWA. Congress made clear its reasons for enacting the ICWA in its Congressional findings, stating specifically: the States, [when] exercising their recogni jurisdiction over Indian chi custody proceedings through administrat and judi al bodies, have often failed to recognize essential tribal relations of Indian people and the cultural and social standards prevailing in Indian com~unities and families. 25 U.S.C. § 1901(5). The ICWA thus protect[s] the rights of [an] Indian child as an Indian . . by making sure that Indian child welfare determinations are not based on a white, middle-class standard which, in many cases, forecloses acement 8 th an Indian ly.n HoI ield, 490 u.s. at 37 rnal quotation marks and alterations omitted). To protect Indian children from these dangers, Congress found it to be in the best interests of Indian children for ster care and parental right proceedings to be  sumptive[ly] under the jurisdiction of a tribal, rat r than state, court. HoI 490 u.s. at 36; see 25 U.S.C. § 1902. is, the presumption of triba juri ction is in and of itself in the best interests of Indian Idren because tribal courts have the rience, sdom, and compassion . . to shion an appropriate remedy in these cases. HoI ield, 490 U.s. at 54; see 25 U.S.C. §§ 1901(3)-(5); 1902; 1911 (B). There is no best interests consideration to be made. Whether post-transfer actions have a negat impact on Indian children was a risk Congress beli appropriate because it is tr 1 courts that are most familiar with, and respons to, the needs of their Indian community and Indian children. 25 U.S.C. § 1901 (4), (5). Additionally, because the ICWA precludes the imposition of 10 standards by creating a broad presumption of jurisdiction in t 1 courts, allowing a best interests consideration under Section 1911(b) defeats the very purpose for which the ICWA was enacted [by allowingj Anglo cultural ases into the analysis. 906 S.W.2d 152, 169-70 (Tex. App. 1995 )