ICWA needs to go

[Derec]

This discriminatory law states that children with any Indian blood, even in single digits, must be placed for adoption with an Indian family. It clearly is discriminatory, and the law doesn't place such ridiculous rules on any other ethnic group. Imagine if law mandated that adopted children had to be placed with an Italian family if they had any Italian blood at all.
Inside the Agonizing Custody Fight Over Six-Year-Old Lexi
She is 1/64th Indian. That's 1.6%! Yet another rotten fruit of the Jimy Carter presidency.

In fact, the whole body of special Indian law should be abolished. Indians should be treated just like any other citizens. No better, no worse. If they want sovereignty they should petition for secession and thereby give up being part of USA and US citizens as well. They should not be allowed to be both at the same time.

 

[laughing dog]

Native american sovereign are the results of treaties between the individual Native American nations and the US. Ending that sovereignty cannot be done unilaterally.

More importantly the ICWA does not say that children with any Indian blood must be placed with a Native American Family ( Indian_Child_Welfare_Act). It gives primary jurisdiction in those matters to the tribal courts. Furthermore, exceptions to the ICWA have been carved out in Supreme Court rulings (something explicitly mentioned in the OP article).

Interestingly, one of the reasons for the ICWA was the practice of the Mormom church to promote the separation of children from their Native American parents into Mormom homes in Utah (see the Wiki article). Lexi (and her sister) were placed with distant relatives in Utah by the courts.

BTW, it is Jimmy is the diminutive of James, not Jimy.

 

[Derec]

Native american sovereign are the results of treaties between the individual Native American nations and the US. Ending that sovereignty cannot be done unilaterally.

Any notion of so-called tribal sovereignty should have ended in 1924 with the Indian Citizenship Act. Right now, Indians are double dipping - taking benefits of either US citizenship or this sham sovereignty whichever suits them better at any given time.
Indians should have to choose between sovereignty and US citizenship.
Besides, many of the special rights given to Indians are result of specific laws, like for example the laws allowing them casino monopolies in many states.

More importantly the ICWA does not say that children with any Indian blood must be placed with a Native American Family ( Indian_Child_Welfare_Act). It gives primary jurisdiction in those matters to the tribal courts. Furthermore, exceptions to the ICWA have been carved out in Supreme Court rulings (something explicitly mentioned in the OP article).

And yet a girl with mere 1.6% Indian blood is ripped from her family to be placed with an Indian family. How is that even constitutional, or just?

Interestingly, one of the reasons for the ICWA was the practice of the Mormom church to promote the separation of children from their Native American parents into Mormom homes in Utah (see the Wiki article). Lexi (and her sister) were placed with distant relatives in Utah by the courts.

But this girl is not being separated from Indian parents (and with 1/64 Indian blood either both her biological parents are 1/64 or one is 1/32 and the other 0). She is being separated from her adoptive parents and placed with distant relatives just because of 1.6% of her ethnicity. Something patently absurd and only being done out of this unwarranted desire to give special rights to Indians. Why should Indian ancestry take precedence over non-Indian ancestry?

BTW, it is Jimmy is the diminutive of James, not Jimy.

A typo. Although, in retrospect, he doesn't deserve the second 'm'. The second 'm' is for winners.

 

[laughing dog]

Any notion of so-called tribal sovereignty should have ended in 1924 with the Indian Citizenship Act. Right now, Indians are double dipping - taking benefits of either US citizenship or this sham sovereignty whichever suits them better at any given time.
Indians should have to choose between sovereignty and US citizenship.
Besides, many of the special rights given to Indians are result of specific laws, like for example the laws allowing them casino monopolies in many states.

You are derailing your own thread.

And yet a girl with mere 1.6% Indian blood is ripped from her family to be placed with an Indian family. How is that even constitutional, or just?

The law has been found constitutional on a number of occasions, so you need to either read up on it or ask a constitutional lawyer. As for justice, adherence to the law does not necessarily generate a justice. The ICWA was a response to injustice - children being taken from their homes and heritage, and placed in completely different situations.

But this girl is not being separated from Indian parents (and with 1/64 Indian blood either both her biological parents are 1/64 or one is 1/32 and the other 0). She is being separated from her adoptive parents and placed with distant relatives just because of 1.6% of her ethnicity.

You are wrong. The issue is that she was not legally adopted.

Something patently absurd and only being done out of this unwarranted desire to give special rights to Indians.

Once again, you choose to mischaracterize a complex issue of the children of recognized sovereign nations being taken from the parents and placed in completely different cultural settings.

Why should Indian ancestry take precedence over non-Indian ancestry?

Read up on history of the ICWA.

 

[bleubird]

Derec,how does any of the stuff you bring up here harm you personally?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Derec,how does any of the stuff you bring up here harm you personally?

You don't have to be personally harmed by something to care about it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...