Native Law

  • Scudero v. State
    NATIVE LAW Emma Giusto In Scudero v. State, 496 P.3d 381 (Alaska 2021), the supreme court held that an Alaska Native’s fishing rights did not exempt him from the State’s fishing regulations. (Id. at 383). Scudero, a member of the Metlakatla Indian Community, was charged with not having a fishing permit, fishing in closed waters, and unlawful ...
  • Ahtna, Inc. v. Department of Natural Resources
    NATIVE LAW Emma Giusto In Ahtna, Inc. v. Department of Natural Resources, 2021 Alas. LEXIS 26 (Alaska, Mar. 12, 2021), the supreme court held that (1) the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA), 43 U.S.C. §§ 1601–1629h extinguished aboriginal title and retroactively validated the State’s right of way over Native land, and (2) the right of way ...
  • Walker E. v. State, Department of Health & Social Services, Office of Children’s Services
    NATIVE LAW, FAMILY LAW Mary Beth Barksdale In Walker E. v. State, Department of Health & Social Services., Office of Children’s Services, 480 P.3d 598, 607 (Alaska 2021), the supreme court upheld the termination of parental rights under the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) and AS 47.10 where the Office of Children’s Services (OCS) had made sufficient ...
  • Clark J. v. State, Department of Health & Social Services, Office of Children’s Services
    NATIVE LAW, FAMILY LAW Mary Beth Barksdale In Clark J. v. State, Department of Health & Social Services, Office of Children’s Services, 483 P.3d 896 (Alaska 2021), the supreme court reversed the Superior Court’s termination of parental rights, finding clear error where the Office of Children’s Services (OCS) had failed to make active efforts to reunite Indian ...
  • 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 ...

Native Law

  • Scudero v. State
    NATIVE LAW Emma Giusto In Scudero v. State, 496 P.3d 381 (Alaska 2021), the supreme court held that an Alaska Native’s fishing rights did not exempt him from the State’s fishing regulations. (Id. at 383). Scudero, a member of the Metlakatla Indian Community, was charged with not having a fishing permit, fishing in closed waters, and unlawful ...
  • Ahtna, Inc. v. Department of Natural Resources
    NATIVE LAW Emma Giusto In Ahtna, Inc. v. Department of Natural Resources, 2021 Alas. LEXIS 26 (Alaska, Mar. 12, 2021), the supreme court held that (1) the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA), 43 U.S.C. §§ 1601–1629h extinguished aboriginal title and retroactively validated the State’s right of way over Native land, and (2) the right of way ...
  • Walker E. v. State, Department of Health & Social Services, Office of Children’s Services
    NATIVE LAW, FAMILY LAW Mary Beth Barksdale In Walker E. v. State, Department of Health & Social Services., Office of Children’s Services, 480 P.3d 598, 607 (Alaska 2021), the supreme court upheld the termination of parental rights under the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) and AS 47.10 where the Office of Children’s Services (OCS) had made sufficient ...
  • Clark J. v. State, Department of Health & Social Services, Office of Children’s Services
    NATIVE LAW, FAMILY LAW Mary Beth Barksdale In Clark J. v. State, Department of Health & Social Services, Office of Children’s Services, 483 P.3d 896 (Alaska 2021), the supreme court reversed the Superior Court’s termination of parental rights, finding clear error where the Office of Children’s Services (OCS) had failed to make active efforts to reunite Indian ...
  • 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 ...