Minnesota Supreme Court ICWA Case–In re R.S. and L.S.

The Center wrote an amici brief for this case on behalf of the Center, Leech Lake and Mille Lacs.  Our discussion of the role of the GAL is in the second half of the brief.

Amici Brief for ILPC, Leech Lake and Mille Lacs

Lower court decision in the case:

Court of Appeals Decision


This entry was posted in Author: Kate E. Fort, ICWA and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Minnesota Supreme Court ICWA Case–In re R.S. and L.S.

  1. Steve C says:

    Mark are you appealing this case? If so why? Is a pre -adoptive placement still not a “foster care placement” ? To my thinking it is just another type of foster placement. Children cannot be returned upon demand. Fact parents have no standing after TPR to demand return (other to invalidate proceedings) does not change foster placement status. Tribe should make that decision whenever possible.

  2. Steve C says:

    Amici brief is spot on. This is the foundation of ICWA. I agree 100%.

  3. Mark Fiddler says:

    Steve: Appealed because my client wanted me to and I thought the RS decision was in error. The case was not a “foster care” placement under ICWA; it was a “preadoptive” placement; and those terms mean different things under ICWA. The child was a state ward, unlike a foster child. The law needs to be cleared up, and no state appellate court has dealt with it in great detail, except the MN Supreme Court will go deeper, however they decide. Lots of Indian advocates weighed in, and I am grateful the Indian bar can argue different positions for their clients. M

  4. Pingback: Minnesota Supreme Court Releases In re R.S. | Turtle Talk

  5. So the most important decision, permanent placement is better made in State Court? I guess that was the intent of Congress. Not even close.

Comments are closed.