ICWA is before the Minnesota Supreme Court again. Here's why
Allison HerreraMPR News
Two Martin County foster parents are getting another audience in front of the Minnesota Supreme Court Tuesday, after arguing last fall that a nearly 50-year-old law that prevented them from adopting two Native children is unconstitutional.
If the couple succeeds in their challenge, it could drastically alter the constitutionality of the law, which is meant to preserve tribal sovereignty and address decades of Native children being severed from their cultures.
The twins at the center of this case were initially placed with foster parents until a lower court ruled they should be placed with a relative. The white foster couple, Kellie and Nathan Reyelts of Fairmont, wanted to adopt the children and claim they've been prevented from doing so because of the Indian Child Welfare Act, or ICWA, and a state companion law known as the Minnesota Indian Family Preservation Act, or MIFPA. They say the law is unfair.
The couple says the placement preferences required under the two laws — that the children be placed with an immediate family member or a foster home approved by the tribe — violate their 5th and 14th Amendment rights.
The twins were removed from the Reyelts' home after the Red Lake Nation, the tribal nation their mother is from and which they are eligible to become citizens of, said they should be placed with an aunt. The twins are now living with their grandmother and have been since September of 2023. An older sibling also resides with them.
Two lower courts already ruled against the Reyelts' claims that the two laws discriminate against them in the adoption process because of their race.
Last fall, they took their case to the Minnesota Supreme Court. Before the court ruled, they asked for a second hearing — Tuesday's — to make the same constitutional claims and add two more issues: Did the district court err in denying their motion for permissive intervention, and did the district court err in dismissing their third party custody petition?
The constitutional issue being considered again: Are the placement preferences of ICWA and MIFPA unconstitutional? The placement preference is with an immediate family member or a placement preference chosen by the Red Lake Nation.
Joseph Plumer, the attorney for the Red Lake Nation, said the reason the plaintiff's attorneys are bringing this case is simple — they want to bring this case before the United States Supreme Court.
During last fall's oral arguments, Associate Justice Anne McKeig, herself a descendant of the White Earth Band of Ojibwe, directly asked Plumer if he thought it was their intention.
'Counsel, can I ask you a question that's probably going to be controversial, but I'm going to ask it anyway. Does there seem to be some — gamesmanship may not be the right word — but do you see this court as an avenue to try to get the issue of constitutionality of the Indian Child Welfare Act before the United States Supreme Court?' McKeig asked.
'Yes,' Plumer responded. 'That's exactly what the appellants are trying to do in this case.'
Shannon Smith, the executive director of the ICWA Law Center, which provides legal services and advocacy to Native families impacted by the child protection system, agrees.
'They are looking, I think, for something that somehow can be distinguishable from the decision in Haaland v. Brackeen,' Smith said.
She is referring to the case involving a white Texas couple who had successfully adopted a Navajo child. Their attorneys, including Mark Fiddler, a citizen of the Turtle Mountain Band of Ojibwe and the attorney representing the Reyelts, argued the laws were race-based and unconstitutional. Even though they lost the case, the court found that the petitioners' claims of equal protection lacked standing, which is why the Reyelts can challenge the placement and claim discrimination.
Fiddler declined to comment to MPR News.
Smith says foster parents are an important part of the system of keeping children safe and providing stability. But, their role is temporary.
'You're temporarily stepping in to care for a child where the intent is for the child to be reunified with a parent or place the relative,' she said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Brooklyn Center attorney suspended by Minnesota Supreme Court
The Minnesota Supreme Court has indefinitely suspended attorney Susan Shogren Smith, who authorities say filed legal challenges in the November 2020 election without permission of the plaintiffs. The suspension from practicing law came Thursday, on the heels of a petition for disciplinary action against Shogren Smith filed by the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility saying that she has conducted professional misconduct. The Brooklyn Center attorney was given a $10,000 sanction in 2021 after a judge found she 'bamboozled' voters into signing on as plaintiffs without their knowledge or permission to file legal challenges against the election of five congressional Democrats. Calls to Shogren Smith on Friday were not returned. The petition for disciplinary action noted that a three-judge panel had determined she had committed a 'fraud on the court' and gave her an additional $15,000 sanction. The petition claims that Shogren Smith has failed to pay the $25,000, according to court documents. 'Respondent's misconduct is serious,' the state Supreme Court document said, 'and involved not just lack of competence and failure to communicate with clients, but dishonesty to the courts and disregard for the discipline process.' The court documents said her actions were 'not a brief lapse of judgement' but something that occurred for several years. Shogren Smith is a member of the MN Election Integrity Team, a conservative group that sought to prevent the state from certifying its election results while President Donald Trump and his allies promoted unfounded claims of election fraud. On Dec. 1, 2020, she filed five complaints in Ramsey County District Court, naming as defendants Secretary of State Steve Simon and the Democratic candidates who won their Congressional races. Those legal challenges were filed in the names of 14 separate voters, at least four of whom had no idea they were participating. 'Susan Shogren Smith … perpetrated a fraud against this court and, more importantly, perpetrated a fraud against these plaintiffs,' Ramsey County Chief District Judge Leonardo Castro said at the time the first sanction was imposed. In February of 2021, Republican activist Corinne Braun discovered her name was connected to one of the cases. 'To my horror, I saw that I had sued Steve Simon and Ilhan Omar. It was a surreal moment for me,' she said, likening the discovery to finding her car had been broken into. Braun testified she had received an anonymous email asking to add her name to a list of disgruntled voters. She filled out the form and signed her name and then forwarded the email to about 5,000 people on her mailing list. As Shogren Smith explained in court, what Braun had signed was an affidavit that agreed she 'will be joining with other voters across Minnesota to contest Minnesota election results.' Braun, though, said she didn't understand the implications. Shogren Smith acknowledged she never spoke with the plaintiffs or informed them of the outcome of the case, even when Braun and two other unwitting plaintiffs were ordered to pay $3,873 to the defendants at the conclusion of the case. Shogren Smith said at the time, she believed someone else with the MN Election Integrity Team was having those conversations with plaintiffs. 'I absolutely believed that those conversations were happening with these plaintiffs,' she said. U.S. Customs Border Protection officer charged with possessing child porn Man once convicted in Minnesota of supporting al-Qaida is now charged in Canada for alleged threats Jury finds Milwaukee man guilty of killing and dismembering 19-year-old woman 'We feel relief': Derrick Thompson found guilty in Minneapolis crash that killed five young women Man charged with hate crime in Boulder attack on 'Zionist people' appears in federal court
USA Today
7 hours ago
- USA Today
Native American boarding school funding under scrutiny in lawsuit
Native American boarding school funding under scrutiny in lawsuit The lawsuit filed by the Wichita and Washoe tribes demands an accounting of an estimated $23.3 billion in misappropriated funds. Show Caption Hide Caption US apologizes for the first time for abuses at Native schools President Joe Biden formally apologized for the abuses committed against Native boarding school students over the past century. Two tribal nations are suing the U.S. government for misusing trust funds meant for Native children's education to finance abusive boarding schools. The lawsuit demands an accounting of an estimated $23.3 billion and details of how the funds were used. The lawsuit follows Interior Department reports detailing abuses and deaths within the boarding school system. Two tribal nations are suing the United States government, saying it misappropriated trust funds to finance the Federal Indian Boarding School program, using monies meant to support Native Nations to instead fuel a system of abuse that spawned generations of trauma, despair and social ills. The Wichita and Affiliated Tribes and the Washoe Tribe of Nevada and California say financing for the boarding school program included Native trust funds taken 'for the supposed purpose of providing money to support Native children's education.' The tribes are demanding a federal accounting of an estimated $23.3 billion in funding taken from those funds, saying the government has never detailed how the monies were used. The lawsuit was filed last month in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, where one of the boarding school system's most notorious campuses – the Carlisle Indian Industrial School – once operated. 'The United States took upon itself the sacred trusteeship over Native children's education – a trust responsibility that has remained unbroken for 200 years,' said Adam Levitt, founding partner of DiCello Levitt, one of four law firms representing the tribes, in a news release. 'At the very least, the United States has a legal and moral obligation to account for the Boarding School Program, including a detailed explanation of the funds that it took and spent.' Federal trust responsibility 'was born of a sacred bargain,' according to the lawsuit. Through numerous treaties, Native Nations promised peace and ceded land; in exchange, the U.S. would provide for the education of their children. 'The land was ceded; the peace was a mirage,' the lawsuit said. 'And the primary victims of decades of ongoing statutory and treaty violations were the Native Nations' children.' The lawsuit names Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, the Interior Department, the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Bureau of Indian Education as defendants. Alyse Sharpe, a spokesperson for the Department of the Interior, told USA TODAY the agency as a matter of policy does not comment on litigation. 'The Department of the Interior remains committed to our trust responsibilities of protecting tribal treaty rights, lands, assets, and resources, in addition to its duty to carry out the mandates of federal law with respect to American Indian and Alaska Native tribes and villages,' Sharpe said. A shameful chapter in US history More than 18,000 children, some as young as 4, were shipped off to 417 federal boarding schools, many run by religious organizations, between 1819 and 1969. The system's detrimental effects were both immediate and long-lasting. Under Interior Secretary Deb Haaland, the department's first Native American director, the agency released reports in 2022 and 2024 detailing the program's abuses, including death, forced labor and physical and sexual abuse. The investigation confirmed the deaths of at least 973 American Indian, Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian children in the boarding school system. According to the lawsuit, the program sought to destroy children's links to their Indigenous families, language and cultural practices, depriving them of skills necessary to participate and succeed in their own communities, indoctrinating them into menial positions and more broadly breeding cycles of poverty, violence and drug addiction. 'The Boarding School Program represents one of the most shameful chapters in American history,' Serrell Smokey, chairman of the Washoe Tribe of Nevada and California, said in the news release. 'Our children were taken from us, subjected to unimaginable horrors, and forced to fund their own suffering. This lawsuit seeks to hold the U.S. government accountable for its actions and to ensure that the truth is finally brought to light.' The lawsuit says the program was not only 'a national disgrace' but violated the government's duty to provide Native children with an education, an obligation that continues today based on a 'unique and continuing trust relationship with and responsibility to the Indian people for the education of Indian children.' 'The Boarding School Program inflicted profound and lasting harm on our communities,' said Amber Silverhorn-Wolfe, president of the Wichita and Affiliated Tribes. 'We are seeking justice not only for the survivors but also for the generations that continue to suffer from the intergenerational trauma caused by these schools.' Faith E. Gay of Selendy Gay, another firm representing the tribes, noted the Interior Department reports revealed not only the scale and scope of the government's actions but that key information related to program financing remains under federal control. Those reports said the boarding school system was part of a pattern of forced assimilation policies pursued or allowed by the U.S. for nearly two centuries and recommended an official apology. President Joe Biden formally apologized for the program in October. 'The harm inflicted by the Boarding School Program endures in the broken families and poor mental and physical health of survivors of the Boarding Schools and their descendants,' the tribal lawsuit reads. 'It endures in the cycles of poverty, desperation, domestic violence, and addiction that were born of the Boarding School Program. It endures in the silence of lost language and culture, and … in the missing remains and unmarked graves of the children who died.'
Yahoo
17 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump Is Pleased Because He Finally Agrees With Elizabeth Warren On Something: Scrap The Debt Limit To Prevent An 'Economic Catastrophe'
Benzinga and Yahoo Finance LLC may earn commission or revenue on some items through the links below. President Donald Trump endorsed abolishing the federal debt limit, unexpectedly siding with long-time critic Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) as Congress races to keep the government from hitting its $37 trillion borrowing cap. What Happened: Trump on Wednesday urged Congress to "entirely scrap" the nation's debt limit, echoing a call Warren issued last week. The president said, in a Truth Social post, that leaving the cap in place hands "economic catastrophe" to politicians who weaponize every vote. Warren posted a similar message on May 30, warning that failure to act would "prevent an economic catastrophe." Trending: Start investing with eToro's CopyTrader — . Screenshot From President Donald Trump's Truth Social Account Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has told lawmakers the government could exhaust its borrowing authority by August, intensifying a partisan clash over Trump's 1,100-page tax-and-spending plan, which already includes a debt-limit increase. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that package would swell federal deficits by $2.4 trillion over 10 years — a projection Warren blasted even as she embraced Trump's call to kill the It Matters: The unusual alignment between Trump and Warren follows years of barbs — Trump once mocked Warren as "Pocahontas" over her Native-American ancestry claims. At the same time, Warren has labeled his economic agenda "textbook corruption." Their latest spat flared again on Tuesday when Warren warned Trump that his 'One Big Beautiful Bill' could fuel rising rents and violate Senate procedural rules. While Trump and Warren now agree on abolishing the limit, they diverge on his broader package. Warren argues it favors the wealthy and piles on debt, citing CBO data. On the other hand, Trump insists the measure delivers growth via tax relief, spending trims, and border security funding. House and Senate leaders must decide whether to keep the limit-scrapping provision in Trump's omnibus bill or stage a separate vote. A failure to strike a deal before August would force the Treasury to deploy "extraordinary measures" — an expensive stop-gap both parties say they want to avoid. Read next: Nancy Pelosi Invested $5 Million In An AI Company Last Year — Here's How You Can Invest In Multiple Pre-IPO AI Startups With Just $1,000. Invest Where It Hurts — And Help Millions Heal: Invest in Cytonics and help disrupt a $390B Big Pharma stronghold. Photo courtesy: / This article Trump Is Pleased Because He Finally Agrees With Elizabeth Warren On Something: Scrap The Debt Limit To Prevent An 'Economic Catastrophe' originally appeared on
