RESPECT FOR THE INDIAN CHILD WELFARE ACT AND ITS REFLECTION ON TRIBAL SOVEREIGNTY

Pub Date : 2020-05-05 DOI:10.2307/j.ctv10vkzsz.10
K. Law
{"title":"RESPECT FOR THE INDIAN CHILD WELFARE ACT AND ITS REFLECTION ON TRIBAL SOVEREIGNTY","authors":"K. Law","doi":"10.2307/j.ctv10vkzsz.10","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"here is a direct tie between a court’s or agency respect for federal and state Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) laws and their understanding of Tribal sovereignty. A review of state court proceedings involving Native American children reflects that states’ lack of understanding and respect for Tribal sovereignty.  That understanding is represented through the actions and failures to act by state agencies, governmental representatives, and the judiciary.  The ICWA requires the United States, every state, every Indian tribe, and territories of the United States to give \"full faith and credit to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of any Indian tribe applicable to Indian child custody proceedings to the same extent that such entities give full faith and credit to the public acts, records and judicial proceedings of any other entity.\" Most of the scholarship on the ICWA attacks state court resistance as unreasonably hostile to the statutory goals at best and anti-Indian at worst. Barbara Ann Atwood, in her law review article,  Flashpoints Under The Indian child Welfare Act: Toward A New Understanding of State Court Resistance , reviews aspects of the state court resistance to ICWA and strives to present a more nuanced understanding of the reactions of state court judges to the unique aspects of ICWA.  In addition to Atwood in her article, Professor Christine Metteer has argued forcefully that state courts have defied the plain language of the federal and state ICWA because of their deep distrust of tribal courts and their entrenched resistance to the concept of tribal sovereignty .","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv10vkzsz.10","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

here is a direct tie between a court’s or agency respect for federal and state Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) laws and their understanding of Tribal sovereignty. A review of state court proceedings involving Native American children reflects that states’ lack of understanding and respect for Tribal sovereignty.  That understanding is represented through the actions and failures to act by state agencies, governmental representatives, and the judiciary.  The ICWA requires the United States, every state, every Indian tribe, and territories of the United States to give "full faith and credit to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of any Indian tribe applicable to Indian child custody proceedings to the same extent that such entities give full faith and credit to the public acts, records and judicial proceedings of any other entity." Most of the scholarship on the ICWA attacks state court resistance as unreasonably hostile to the statutory goals at best and anti-Indian at worst. Barbara Ann Atwood, in her law review article,  Flashpoints Under The Indian child Welfare Act: Toward A New Understanding of State Court Resistance , reviews aspects of the state court resistance to ICWA and strives to present a more nuanced understanding of the reactions of state court judges to the unique aspects of ICWA.  In addition to Atwood in her article, Professor Christine Metteer has argued forcefully that state courts have defied the plain language of the federal and state ICWA because of their deep distrust of tribal courts and their entrenched resistance to the concept of tribal sovereignty .
分享
查看原文
尊重印第安儿童福利法及其对部落主权的反思
法院或机构对联邦和州《印第安儿童福利法》(ICWA)的尊重与他们对部落主权的理解之间存在直接联系。对涉及美国土著儿童的州法院诉讼的回顾反映出各州对部落主权缺乏理解和尊重。这种理解通过国家机构、政府代表和司法机构的作为和不作为体现出来。ICWA要求美国,每个州,每个印第安部落和美国领土“完全信任适用于印第安儿童监护程序的任何印第安部落的公共行为,记录和司法程序,就像这些实体完全信任任何其他实体的公共行为,记录和司法程序一样。”大多数关于ICWA的学术研究攻击州法院的抵抗,往好了说,是对法定目标的无理敌视,往坏了说,是反印第安人的。芭芭拉·安·阿特伍德在她的法律评论文章《印度儿童福利法下的闪点:对州法院抵制的新理解》中,回顾了州法院对ICWA的抵制,并努力对州法院法官对ICWA独特方面的反应提出了更细致的理解。除了阿特伍德在她的文章中,克里斯汀·米特尔教授还有力地指出,州法院无视联邦和州ICWA的简单语言,因为他们对部落法院的极度不信任,以及他们对部落主权概念的根深蒂固的抵制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信