Apr 292017
 

The Goldwater Institute filed their notice of appeal to the 9th Circuit in the Arizona ICWA class action case.

Download (PDF, 89KB)

A.D. v. Washburn (Goldwater Litigation)
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Case No. 17-15839

https://turtletalk.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/1-1_scheduling-order.pdf

The parties shall meet the following time schedule.
If there were reported hearings, the parties shall designate and, if necessary, cross designate the transcripts pursuant to 9th Cir. R. 10-3.1. If there were no reported hearings, the transcript deadlines do not apply.
Wed., May 3, 2017 Mediation Questionnaire due. If your registration for Appellate ECF is confirmed after this date, the
Mediation Questionnaire is due within one day of receiving the email from PACER confirming your registration.
Wed., May 24, 2017 Transcript shall be ordered.
Fri., June 23, 2017 Transcript shall be filed by court reporter.
Wed., August 2, 2017 Appellant’s opening brief and excerpts of record shall be served and filed pursuant to FRAP 32 and
9th Cir. R. 32-1.
Fri., September 1, 2017 Appellees’ answering brief and excerpts of record shall be served and filed pursuant to FRAP 32 and 9th Cir. R. 32-1.
The optional appellant’s reply brief shall be filed and served within fourteen days of service of the appellees’ brief, pursuant to FRAP 32 and 9th Cir. R. 32-1.

Failure of the appellant to comply with the Time Schedule Order will result in automatic dismissal of the appeal. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1.
Case: 17-15839, 04/26/2017, ID: 10411309, DktEntry: 1-1, Page 3 of 4
(3 of 17)
FOR THE COURT:
MOLLY C. DWYER
CLERK OF COURT
By: Janne Nicole Millare Rivera
Deputy Clerk
Ninth Circuit Rule 27-7

Apr 142017
 

Three-yr-old Lauryn Whiteshield was murdered a little over a month after her arrival to her grandfather’s home in the spring of 2013.
This twenty minute video examines the effect of federal Indian policy on the lives, liberty, and property of U.S. citizens across America.
Although the last two U.S censuses show that 75% of tribal members do not live within Indian Country and many have never had any association with the reservation system, federal policies mandate tribal government jurisdiction over individuals of lineage in several areas.
1) Across America, children who have never been near a reservation nor involved in tribal customs – including multi-racial children with extremely minimal blood quantum – have been removed from homes they love and placed with strangers. Some children have been severely hurt in the process.
2) Women victimized by violence can be denied the option of county court, regardless whether they believe justice cannot be obtained in tribal court.
3) Further, the Department of Interior holds title to the property of millions of individual tribal members. Adult citizens are not allowed to sell or use their property as collateral without permission.
This study looks at the practical impact and documented repercussions of policies that, based solely on a person’s lineage, set limitations on what they may do with their lives, children, and property.

Please share this with your friends.

PLEASE also share with YOUR Congressmen. MANY of them take a stand on all kinds of things – from orphans in Russia to immigrants and refugees from overseas. DEMAND that they take a strong stand for children in the United States – CITIZENS subject to abuse by a law they – Congress – created and MUST remove.

Most especially – share your thoughts on this video with the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs – Senator John Hoeven.

Find your State’s Senator and Congressmen here:
https://www.senate.gov/
https://www.house.gov/

Thank you – and PLEASE Share….

Learn More.

http://DyingInIndianCountry.com

https://www.facebook.com/CAICW.org/

Feb 202017
 

Over the years, we have seen so many distraught families – panicked over what was happening to their children, unsure what to do to protect them, and unable to get help.

Many times, especially in light of the new ICWA rules and guidelines published by the Obama admin in 2016, …there has been little a family could do.

Watching several families struggle at this current time, we have come to a decision:

Whereas, up to half of Americans believe sanctuaries from federal law are a good and reasonable necessity – where people, fleeing oppression from their home nation, can hide from federal law that would send them back to that home nation;

And Whereas; most American citizens believe federal laws that target, isolate, and separate children and families on the basis of heritage are unconstitutional and should not be allowed;

And Whereas, for decades in America, many Christian church buildings have served as sanctuaries, and while there is no law defining a sanctuary or mandating it be respected, the federal government has often declined to enter and forcibly remove people from a declared Christian Sanctuary;

And Whereas, federal authorities have shown their willingness to ignore state and federal law for the last two years when they declined to enter the Cheyenne River Reservation to remove two little girls who were taken from North Dakota by their non-custodial mother when their non-tribal fathers were granted legal custody; and federal authorities have also shown their willingness to ignore federal law in several cases during the 1980’s when Guatemalan illegal-immigrants sought sanctuary in various church buildings around the country;

And Whereas; many children of tribal heritage, even in teen years, have expressed their desire to stay with their chosen families and not be uprooted by tribal governments, but were ignored by tribal, state and/or federal officials;

And Whereas; many birth parents have objected to tribal jurisdiction over, or involvement in, their families, and have made it clear they do NOT want their children on the reservation or their custody case heard in tribal court, but were ignored by tribal, state and/or federal officials;

And Whereas; many extended family, of varied heritages, have had children removed from them by tribal officials for no other reason than that the tribal officials did not like that branch of the family, or the family was non-Indian, or there were friends or family of tribal officials that wanted the child;

And Whereas; there are many documented instances of tribal courts practicing corruption and nepotism in their choice of homes for children, despite clear evidence of harm to children in those homes;

And Whereas; an untenable number of children have been sexually abused, seriously injured or murdered as a result of placement in homes under the Indian Child Welfare Act;

And Whereas; there is solid legal argument concerning the unconstitutionality of the ‘Indian Child Welfare Act,’ and Justice Clarence Thomas intimated as much in his concurrence in the case, “Adoptive Couple vs. Baby Girl;

And Whereas; once a child has been placed in the custody of a tribal government, particularly within reservation boundaries, it can be extremely difficult to remove the child;

The Christian Alliance for Indian Child Welfare does hereby from this day forward declare itself a ‘Sanctuary for Children and Families Threatened by the Indian Child Welfare Act.’

Families will need to show:

1) It is in the child’s clear best interest to remain with them; or that while best interest might yet be unclear, the child needs more time for all aspects to be studied and for true best interest to be made clear; and
2) They are in imminent danger of being forcibly removed by tribal authorities and/or local police under the direction of tribal authorities.
3) They intend to tirelessly work a plan of action to prove and win the best interest of the particular child or children;
4) Understand the CAICW sanctuary they would stay in is a Christian home – where Jesus Christ is Lord.

Lastly, we fully respect President Trump’s position concerning federal funds – and can proudly guarantee we will not be requesting or requiring any federal funds for this Sanctuary.

Families can contact us by messenger or email.

PLEASE – share this message freely.

__________________________________________________

– – Those who object to this and see things from a progressive perspective can explain why they feel it is okay for sanctuaries to shield people of some heritages from some federal laws, but not people of other heritages from other federal laws.

– – Those who see things from a conservative perspective and object to any instance where a person is shielded from federal law… We can only beg your understanding that these children are American citizens, and the federal law in question does not provide equal protection. Please ask your Senators and Congressman to act quickly on repealing this law, so that no child of tribal heritage will need a sanctuary.

Jun 112016
 

RE: Lexi, the little girl torn from her family in California after being labeled ‘Indian’ and subjected to a racist law; a law which as of June 8, 2016 – when the BIA published new, stricter rules – has become manifold worse for dissident and even non-Indian families.

Lexi is NOT alone. It is very important you know that. This is happening and has happened to many children across America. Two of our CAICW board members are former ICWA children and have told their story in the hope someone will listen.

This racist law is said to have been enacted to protect children – but we have a long list of testimony from families and former ICWA children stating the contrary.

We strongly believe the real reason for ICWA was never about protecting children – but about the fact that so many tribal members over the decades have taken their families and left the reservation system. According to the last two U.S. censuses – 75% of tribal members DO NOT live in Indian Country. People have been leaving for decades – – many times voluntarily as the incidence of crime and corruption on many reservations has grown.

ICWA, as written, fixes the membership drain – bringing back children and grandchildren of families who had left. It would not have been written to include unenrolled children, or children who have never had connection to Indian Country, if it wasn’t about taking back the children of dissident families. That is why tribal leaders have been so against the “Existing Indian Family Doctrine.” It is all about dissident families who have been deliberately keeping a distance.

Claiming that children have been kidnapped by social services – (while there was some historical truth to this to a certain extent) – has been a talking point meant to pull at the heart strings of America. Far more children have left the reservation system with their parents and extended family than have ever been taken by social services.

And many in our federal govt are helping the tribal leaders do this. The Tribal Justice Dept at the DOJ has made it clear on many occasions that they are not there to help individuals, they are there to support tribal governments. The BIA and the ACF do the same.

It appears the federal government has decided that tribal members themselves are expendable to the larger wishes and demands of tribal leadership. Any child with even a small amount of tribal heritage is less important than children of other heritages. They are deliberately left out of laws that protect other children.

These children apparently exist to be bandied about at the will of strangers within tribal governments – who have been granted the right to claim ownership over any child they choose…

The child’s best interest or feelings in the matter are apparently of no concern to the federal government or tribal leaders, who rake more federal dollars per head.

The new rules published by the BIA on June 8 make it even worse.

Who is factually benefiting from the demand that any child ‘in need of care’ who the tribal government decides to claim should be handed over to them?

The AG for the Cherokee Nation stated in 2012 that they had over 100 attorneys targeting 1500 children across the US – many of whom had less than 25% blood quantum and had never been near the tribe.

Why are they doing this?

Follow the money. Numerous federal agencies dole out funds to tribal governments based on the U.S census counts, tribal enrollment, and what is known as “child counts.”

QUOTE from the Federal Register: May 9, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 90): (Note – this is just ONE example of funding…)

    “Title IV-B 1 funding is a per-capita formula based on Tribal population under 21. Tribal allotments are deducted from the State’s total IV-B 1 allotment for that fiscal year.

    “Title IV-B 2 funding is a 3% set-aside of the total Title IV-B 2 budget for State and Tribes. The formula is based on a ratio of the number of children (under age 21) in the Tribe to the total number of children in all Tribes with approved plans.

    “Why apply? Title IV-B funds are very flexible and may be used to meet the unique child welfare needs of your community. Tribes determine their own priorities in developing goals and strategies.”

…That said… right now – at least 60 tribal governments are considering changing their constitutions to do away with “blood quantum” and go with lineage – so they can grow their numbers as the Cherokee Nation has – claiming children with as little as 1% heritage.

Follow the money.

WHEN we as citizens take our federal government back from those who have been using it as their personal playground and cash machine – can we get some help in ensuring ALL citizens – and children – are able to receive equal protection under the law?

One thing that MUST be done – is to STOP giving tribal leaders money on a ‘per head’ basis. STOP using our children as chattel – and a lot of this problem will go away.

(NOTE: NONE of the treaties promise funds based on number of children. In FACT – Most of the treaties only promised funds for a certain number of years – most often twenty years – and on a depreciating scale, while also providing goods and services during that time to help the reservation develop an economy. There is NO wording that funds will go on as long as the “grass grows.”)

People need to start actually reading the treaties.

FACT: MY children and grandchildren were never a treaty promise to the tribal government.

Mar 302016
 

Bismarck, ND – On March 21, a 6-year-old girl of 1/64 Choctaw ancestry was taken crying from her home by social services, placed in a car, and driven to another state.

Many realize current federal Indian policies are hurting people. What many don’t know is the extent. Dozens of children across the nation currently face the same situation Lexi faced – if not worse.

To date, Lexi’s removal caused the biggest public ICWA reaction ever as the presence of dozens from within her community initially delayed her from being taken, then personally witnessed her removal in tears. Hundreds of thousands saw the video clips and reacted for a child 98% non-native, removed from her home solely due to the Indian Child Welfare Act. The resulting petition garnered signatures from 100 countries around the world.

According to the last two U.S censuses, 75% of persons eligible for tribal membership do not live in “Indian Country.” Over the last few decades, many families of heritage have left the reservations due to the level of corruption and crime. As families left, tribal leaders – panicked by declining membership – pushed Congress for increased control over children of heritage.

This includes children who are multi-heritage, who’ve never been near Indian Country, and whose only connection is a dissident great-grandparent who purposefully left the system decades ago.

Worse, some tribal governments refuse to allow kids to live in foster homes off reservation – even if there are no safe homes currently available on the reservation.

As reported by Tom Sullivan, Regional Director for ‘Administration of Children and Families,’ this has resulted in
Tom Sullivan - Regional Administrator ACF children being placed where ever available – including homes of known child abusers and sex offenders. Mr. Sullivan reported this multiple times to his DC superiors, who told him to cease reporting it, and after he refused, recently began the process of firing him.

Despite documented deaths of children and mass exodus from Indian Country, federal government consistently looks the other way while tribal leaders claim to speak for everyone and demand additional funds and increased control over children.

NICWA, NARF, the Casey Foundation and Tribal leaders do NOT speak for everyone, nor do they know what is best for every individual child of heritage – no matter whether that child is 100% or 1%. Rhetoric otherwise is the epitome of racism.

Unfortunately, federal government has literally made the decision to protect tribal sovereignty at all cost – even the cost of our children. In fact, the BIA is preparing additional rules to strengthen ICWA. Roland and his newborn, 1990

America is already angry with government over corrupt bureaucracies, lack of protection for citizens, and inaction by Congress.

CAICW is asking Americans to contact their Congressmen to oppose the new BIA rules, rescind the Indian Child Welfare Act, and protect a brave public servant – whistleblower Tom Sullivan.

###

Elizabeth Morris is Chair of the Christian Alliance for Indian Child Welfare and author of “Dying in Indian Country.” is both a ministry and advocacy group. CAICW has also been advocating since February 2004 for families at risk of harm from the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA). Our advocacy has been both judicial and educational, as well as a prayer resource for families and a shoulder to cry on.

Mar 202016
 

URGENT PRAYER: A little 6-yr-old girl was torn from her home Monday, 3/21/16 – taken from the only home she has known and loved to be placed with strangers.

This is due to the Indian Child Welfare Act – which pushes the false and racist notion that children of even a small amount of heritage are somehow different from other children – and do not bond, love or thrive in homes outside of Indian Country.

Tribal governments – which receive more federal money per head – claim it is in the genes.

This racist notion is pushed by media and even our Congress – although no such gene has been shown to exist – and despite testimony of myriad children, adults, and families of heritage across the nation that they are content, happy and thriving in their homes outside of Indian Country.

Many families have left Indian Country because they DO NOT want to be chattel for tribal governments.
– The family of the author of this post is one of them.


Sign petition here:
https://www.change.org/p/keep-lexi-home
Read More Here:
https://www.facebook.com/saveourlexi/

.

Mar 162016
 
Sunset on the Rez

Whistle-blower Thomas Sullivan, the one HHS/ACF official who has stood up against the rampant sexual abuse on many reservations, is about to be fired by his DC Superiors.

They have come up with several accusations against him, but if you have followed his work and the threats they have made against him over the last three years – you know that all he has ever done is defy their orders to shut up about the overwhelming abuse of children, and release his reports to the public when his DC superiors ignored them.

Tom Sullivan - Regional Administrator ACF

Tom Sullivan is a hero – working to protect our children fromleaders who simply use and abuse them for purposes of power and money.

The following is the latest letter – a 6 page list of accusations from his superiors…

On the last page, you see a handwritten note from his superior that says;

Employee refused to sign document before having an opportunity to review it.
Mishaela Duran 3-10-16

(Why shouldn’t a man be allowed to review a document before he signs it?)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Proposed Removal 752CD - Thomas Sullivan - 03102016-1

Proposed Removal 752CD - Thomas Sullivan - 03102016-2

Proposed Removal 752CD - Thomas Sullivan - 03102016-3

Proposed Removal 752CD - Thomas Sullivan - 03102016-4

Proposed Removal 752CD - Thomas Sullivan - 03102016-5

Proposed Removal 752CD - Thomas Sullivan - 03102016-6

May 282015
 

By Tony Mauro, The National Law Journal
May 27, 2015

“A husband-wife team from two Washington, D.C., law offices filed suit Wednesday challenging strict new government guidelines for adopting Native American children in the aftermath of a landmark 2013 U.S. Supreme Court ruling.

“Lori Alvino McGill, a partner at Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, and her husband Matthew McGill, a partner at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, filed the case on behalf of the National Council for Adoption and other groups and individuals, including birth parents who placed Indian children with non-Indian adoptive parents…”

Read more: http://www.nationallawjournal.com/id=1202727560257/New-Challenge-to-Native-American-Adoption-Rules#ixzz3bRgBBAWm

READ THE LAWSUIT IN PDF HERE –
https://files.acrobat.com/a/preview/45a843bd-720a-4588-9c1f-e68acd715a58