- Peidlow v. Williams
NATIVE LAW
Kristen M. Renberg, Ph.D.
In Peidlow v. Williams,1the supreme court held that the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) requires a superior court that receives a tribal court order to first determine whether the order was issued in an ICWA child custody proceeding, and if it was, to follow the full faith and credit mandate of ...
- Matter of April S.
FAMILY LAW / NATIVE LAW
Jacob Keohane
Matter of April S.
In the Matter of April S., 467 P.3d 1091 (Alaska, 2020), the supreme court ruled that an out-of-state mental health professional qualified as an expert under the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA), given the severity of the child’s psychiatric conditions. The ICWA requires state agencies to present ...
- Peidlow v. Williams
In Peidlow v. Williams,¹ the supreme court held that the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) requires a superior court that receives a tribal court order to first determine whether the order was issued in an ICWA child custody proceeding, and if it was, to follow the full faith and credit mandate of the ICWA. The ...
- Bill S. v. State, Department of Health & Social Services
In Bill S. v. State, Department of Health & Social Services, the Supreme Court held that clear and convincing evidence of active efforts to prevent the breakup of an Indian Family under the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) must include documented efforts to provide specific assistance rather than vague and overgeneralized testimony. The Office of ...
- Sam M. v. State, Department of Health & Social Services
In Sam M. v. State, Department of Health & Social Services, the supreme court reiterated that courts must look to the Office of Children Services’ (OCS) efforts during the entirety of a case to assess whether it made active efforts to keep Indian children with their parents. Sam M. sought custody of his biological daughter ...
