“And that doesn’t apply when your children are governed outside of the tribe. “One of the pillars of sovereignty is to make laws and be governed by them,” Skenandore told Tribal Business News. Brackeen is part of a larger campaign to undermine Tribal sovereignty and gut the legal infrastructure that codifies Tribal sovereignty.”Īttorney Samantha Skenandore (Ho-Chunk Nation) of Quarles and Brady LLP said the decision reinforces the foundation of tribal sovereignty: tribal membership. “While today’s victory is to be celebrated, this will not be the last time a case against Tribal rights will be brought to the courts,” LeBlanc said in a statement. Judith LeBlanc, board chair of NDN Collective, called today’s Supreme Court’s decision “a small win in the larger fight” to maintain Tribal sovereignty and cultural continuity for generations. The Indian Child Welfare Act was our Nation’s promise: never again.”
These were acts of unspeakable cruelty that affected generations of Native children and threatened the very survival of Tribal Nations. They were sent to boarding schools or to be raised by non-Indian families-all with the aim of erasing who they are as Native people and tribal citizens. “In the not-so-distant past, Native children were stolen from the arms of the people who loved them. “I stand alongside Tribal Nations as they celebrate today’s Supreme Court decision,” President Joseph R.
Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito filed dissenting opinions. In adopting ICWA, “Congress exercised (its) lawful authority to secure the right of Indian parents to raise their families as they please, the right of Indian children to grow in their culture, and the right of Indian communities to resist fading into the twilight of history,” Gorsuch wrote in a concurring opinion. “But the bottom line is that we reject all of petitioners’ challenges to the statute, some on the merits and others for lack of standing.”īarrett was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justices Neil Gorsuch, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Brett Kavanaugh and Ketanji Brown Jackson. “The issues are complicated,” Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote in the majority opinion. The court did not rule on the merits of two additional claims - an equal protection challenge to ICWA’s placement preferences and a challenge to ICWA’s provision allowing tribes to alter the placement preferences-because the Brackeens and other petitioners did not have standing to raise them. The nation's highest court found that ICWA does not discriminate on the basis of race and does not impose an undue burden on states.
0 kommentar(er)
