South Dakota Doesn't Support ICWA in Court

[TexasTowelie]

Earlier this month, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a mixed ruling in the Brackeen case, in which some non-Natives are challenging the constitutionality of the Indian Child Welfare Act, which, among other things, gives preference to Native families in the adoption of Native children. Broadly, the Fifth Circuit found ICWA constitutional, but the court ruled that ICWA goes too far in requiring states to enforce it.

26 states and the District of Columbia filed an amicus brief supporting ICWA and Native claims. In their December 2019 brief, those ICWA-friendly states note that they are home to 94% of federally recognized tribes and 69% of the total American Indian and Alaska Native population.

South Dakota has 1.3% of the nation’s Native population. South Dakota itself is 10% Indian. South Dakota did not join the amicus brief to defend the Indian Child Welfare Act. Our neighbors in Minnesota, Iowa, and Montana did, but we did not… because apparently, South Dakota is not a friend of Indians, children, welfare, or action.

https://dakotafreepress.com/2021/04/27/south-dakota-doesnt-support-icwa-in-court/
(no more at link)

[tirebiter]

1. Doesn't really matter what the individual states want.

They can make that known to the BIA at the national level, if they so desire. The treaties are nation to nation contracts. Even Reagen recognized that.

[abqtommy]

2. Of course anyone born in The Americas is a Native but some Natives are Indigenous.

Some Indigenous persons don't mind being called Indians but some do and either group
will let us know. Words and language matter and that's why I natter.