FINALLY!
October 4, 2018
Northern District Court of Texas, Civil Action No. 4:17-cv-00868-0
BRAKEEN v.. ZINKE
ICWA DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL
Among several other requests that were granted –
F. Indian Commerce Clause Claim
Plaintiffs also claim Congress did not have the constitutional authority to pass sections 1901–23 and sections 1951–52 of the ICWA under the Indian Commerce Clause. Ind. Pls.’ Br. 66, ECF No. 80; State Pls.’ Br. 49–52, ECF No. 74. Defendants counter that the Indian Commerce Case 4:17-cv-00868-O Document 166 Filed 10/04/18 Page 46 of 47 PageID 4175
47
Clause grants Congress plenary authority over Indian Affairs. Fed. Def’s Resp. Ind. 35, ECF No. 123; Trib. Defs.’ Resp. 21–28, ECF No. 118. But as shown above, Murphy does not permit Congress to directly command the States in this regard, even when it relies on Commerce Clause power. Murphy, 138 S. Ct. at 1479. Therefore Plaintiffs’ request for a declaration that these sections are unconstitutional is GRANTED.
Final Judgment ICWA STRUCK DOWN
167_-_final_judgment ICWA STRUCK DOWN –
Brackeen v Zinke – ICWA UNCONSTITUTIONAL
166_-_order_on_msj
START WRITING YOUR AMICUS BRIEFS
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.