Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Posted: 6/25/2013 5:44:47 AM EST
link

A South Carolina couple that adopted a Cherokee girl at birth has the right to raise the child regardless of a federal law intended to keep Indian families together, the Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.
In a 5-4 decision, the high court sided with the white couple against a Cherokee Nation member from Oklahoma who claimed the Indian Child Welfare Act gave him the legal right to custody of his daughter, who had been adopted at birth.


Link Posted: 6/25/2013 5:46:47 AM EST
Link Posted: 6/25/2013 5:47:34 AM EST
[Last Edit: 6/25/2013 5:48:01 AM EST by Angel_King]
Originally Posted By Silence:
link

A South Carolina couple that adopted a Cherokee girl at birth has the right to raise the child regardless of a federal law intended to keep Indian families together, the Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.
In a 5-4 decision, the high court sided with the white couple against a Cherokee Nation member from Oklahoma who claimed the Indian Child Welfare Act gave him the legal right to custody of his daughter, who had been adopted at birth.




So 140 year old laws can become archaic? Who knew.
Link Posted: 6/25/2013 6:08:59 AM EST
I wonder if this can be used to strike the defacto ban on cross racial adoptions that exists in most state's CPS and foster care systems. Social workers would rather let a black child die than let a white couple adopt him.
Link Posted: 6/25/2013 6:29:07 AM EST
wait. this was another remand?

My over-caffienated 40-second skim suggests that they did not turn over the law but rather said it did not reply in this instance, essentially because the father was nothing more than a baby-daddy and there was no extant family to break up.

Link Posted: 6/25/2013 6:49:34 AM EST
Blood is Blood. Regardless he might be an A1 Chickenshit but that is still his daughter, maybe he had his parental transformation.
who is to say that the father would not turn into a favorable parent? if not the ideal parent for his child.

My Great Grandmother was removed by Indian Agents from her family as a small child in SE Oklahoma and sent to an Indian School in Kansas. You could say that we are jaded at the thought of not just a child being adopted away from a Father that wants them, but also from a Tribal standpoint.

I know alot of people here could care less or not understand our point of view on this.

would you take a child from a Hasidic Jewish family in the same situation and give them to a Baptist?
Link Posted: 6/25/2013 6:56:09 AM EST
[Last Edit: 6/25/2013 7:08:15 AM EST by Rogue-Sasquatch]
Originally Posted By LowBeta:
wait. this was another remand?

My over-caffienated 40-second skim suggests that they did not turn over the law but rather said it did not reply in this instance, essentially because the father was nothing more than a baby-daddy and there was no extant family to break up.



He was given a no-contact order before the child was even born, and was deployed (or about to deploy, can't remember for sure) when he found out she was being put up for adoption. Kind of makes it hard to establish the whole "parental relationship" when the mother won't let you. He wasn't just some baby-daddy, he was a father who wanted to keep his daughter.

The ICWA was written for a very damn good reason with lessons learned the extremely hard way. My wife and son are native. The father and daughter here got screwed even though he had a federal law on his side specifically to protect him from this. Goes to show that nothing can protect you from a government that feels like you should lose.
Link Posted: 6/25/2013 6:56:12 AM EST
[Last Edit: 6/25/2013 6:57:28 AM EST by Statman]
The kid is 1.2% Indian. I'm amazed they still use the Indian label.
Link Posted: 6/25/2013 6:59:14 AM EST
Originally Posted By Statman:
When you relinquish your rights permanently, especially pre-birth, you don't have the right to change your mind and ask a court to help you enforce your desires.

Good ruling by the Supreme Court IMHO.


that is the sword blade. I agree due to this point alone. it is a truly a sad case for everyone.


Link Posted: 6/25/2013 7:03:00 AM EST
Dupe

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1500832_Adoptive_Couple_v__Baby_Girl___Friends_Won_in_Supreme_Court_Today.html

This thread may have been first, but the OP of the second thread personally knows the couple who won.
Link Posted: 6/25/2013 7:05:18 AM EST
[Last Edit: 6/25/2013 7:07:47 AM EST by Rogue-Sasquatch]
Originally Posted By Statman:
The kid is 1.2% Indian. I'm amazed they still use the Indian label.


Tribal citizenship is all that counts. Blood quantums were invented at the beginning of the reservation era to try and eradicate the tribes slowly. They're nothing but AWB-style grandfathering on native tribes. Can't wipe them out directly? Use math so that in a few generations none of them statistically qualify as "pure" enough to meet the criteria you made up. Boom, now we can take their shit.

It was a eugenicist anti-cultural weapon, nothing more and nothing less.
Link Posted: 6/25/2013 7:05:59 AM EST
Originally Posted By Statman:
The kid is 1.2% Indian. I'm amazed they still use the Indian label.


1.2%?!

By that standard, I could claim that I'm Cherokee.
Link Posted: 6/25/2013 7:07:41 AM EST
[Last Edit: 6/25/2013 7:08:23 AM EST by AJ-IN-JAX]
IIRC wasn't the plaintiff an ARFCOMMER or a friend of one?

ETA: Nevermind, I see the link.
Link Posted: 6/25/2013 7:24:22 AM EST

Originally Posted By Rogue-Sasquatch:
Originally Posted By LowBeta:
wait. this was another remand?

My over-caffienated 40-second skim suggests that they did not turn over the law but rather said it did not reply in this instance, essentially because the father was nothing more than a baby-daddy and there was no extant family to break up.



He was given a no-contact order before the child was even born, and was deployed (or about to deploy, can't remember for sure) when he found out she was being put up for adoption. Kind of makes it hard to establish the whole "parental relationship" when the mother won't let you. He wasn't just some baby-daddy, he was a father who wanted to keep his daughter.

The ICWA was written for a very damn good reason with lessons learned the extremely hard way. My wife and son are native. The father and daughter here got screwed even though he had a federal law on his side specifically to protect him from this. Goes to show that nothing can protect you from a government that feels like you should lose.

Where'd ya read that?
Link Posted: 6/25/2013 7:30:16 AM EST
[Last Edit: 6/25/2013 7:30:45 AM EST by LoBrau]
Originally Posted By OKnativeson:
Blood is Blood. Regardless he might be an A1 Chickenshit but that is still his daughter, maybe he had his parental transformation.
who is to say that the father would not turn into a favorable parent? if not the ideal parent for his child.

My Great Grandmother was removed by Indian Agents from her family as a small child in SE Oklahoma and sent to an Indian School in Kansas. You could say that we are jaded at the thought of not just a child being adopted away from a Father that wants them, but also from a Tribal standpoint.

I know alot of people here could care less or not understand our point of view on this.

would you take a child from a Hasidic Jewish family in the same situation and give them to a Baptist?


Nobody TOOK anybody from anybody. The child was given up for adoption at birth, just like any other child who is given up for adoption at birth. Dad didn't want any part of it, and later had (non)buyer's remorse, but since he's more special than any other biological father who may find himself in a similar situation, he gets an automatic do-over with no regard for the welfare of the child? How bizarre.
Link Posted: 6/25/2013 7:57:17 AM EST
Originally Posted By Rogue-Sasquatch:
Originally Posted By Statman:
The kid is 1.2% Indian. I'm amazed they still use the Indian label.


Tribal citizenship is all that counts. Blood quantums were invented at the beginning of the reservation era to try and eradicate the tribes slowly. They're nothing but AWB-style grandfathering on native tribes. Can't wipe them out directly? Use math so that in a few generations none of them statistically qualify as "pure" enough to meet the criteria you made up. Boom, now we can take their shit.

It was a eugenicist anti-cultural weapon, nothing more and nothing less.


Tell that to the tribes that are using blood quantums to kick people off the roles.
Link Posted: 6/25/2013 8:05:46 AM EST
[Last Edit: 6/25/2013 8:06:14 AM EST by Sykkone]

Originally Posted By LoBrau:
Originally Posted By OKnativeson:
Blood is Blood. Regardless he might be an A1 Chickenshit but that is still his daughter, maybe he had his parental transformation.
who is to say that the father would not turn into a favorable parent? if not the ideal parent for his child.

My Great Grandmother was removed by Indian Agents from her family as a small child in SE Oklahoma and sent to an Indian School in Kansas. You could say that we are jaded at the thought of not just a child being adopted away from a Father that wants them, but also from a Tribal standpoint.

I know alot of people here could care less or not understand our point of view on this.

would you take a child from a Hasidic Jewish family in the same situation and give them to a Baptist?


Nobody TOOK anybody from anybody. The child was given up for adoption at birth, just like any other child who is given up for adoption at birth. Dad didn't want any part of it, and later had (non)buyer's remorse, but since he's more special than any other biological father who may find himself in a similar situation, he gets an automatic do-over with no regard for the welfare of the child? How bizarre.

No more bizarre than your opinion which quite differs from:

Originally Posted By The USSC:
Approximately four months after Baby Girl’s birth,Adoptive Couple served Biological Father with notice ofthe pending adoption. (This was the first notificationthat they had provided to Biological Father regarding the adoption proceeding.) Biological Father signed papersstating that he accepted service and that he was "not contesting the adoption." App. 37. But Biological Fatherlater testified that, at the time he signed the papers, hethought that he was relinquishing his rights to Birth Mother, not to Adoptive Couple.

Biological Father contacted a lawyer the day after signing the papers, and subsequently requested a stay of theadoption proceedings.2 In the adoption proceedings, Biological Father sought custody and stated that he did not consent to Baby Girl’s adoption. Moreover, Biological Father took a paternity test, which verified that he was Baby Girl’s biological father.



Link Posted: 6/25/2013 8:15:12 AM EST
Originally Posted By Sykkone:

Originally Posted By LoBrau:
Originally Posted By OKnativeson:
Blood is Blood. Regardless he might be an A1 Chickenshit but that is still his daughter, maybe he had his parental transformation.
who is to say that the father would not turn into a favorable parent? if not the ideal parent for his child.

My Great Grandmother was removed by Indian Agents from her family as a small child in SE Oklahoma and sent to an Indian School in Kansas. You could say that we are jaded at the thought of not just a child being adopted away from a Father that wants them, but also from a Tribal standpoint.

I know alot of people here could care less or not understand our point of view on this.

would you take a child from a Hasidic Jewish family in the same situation and give them to a Baptist?


Nobody TOOK anybody from anybody. The child was given up for adoption at birth, just like any other child who is given up for adoption at birth. Dad didn't want any part of it, and later had (non)buyer's remorse, but since he's more special than any other biological father who may find himself in a similar situation, he gets an automatic do-over with no regard for the welfare of the child? How bizarre.

No more bizarre than your opinion which quite differs from:

Originally Posted By The USSC:
Approximately four months after Baby Girl’s birth,Adoptive Couple served Biological Father with notice ofthe pending adoption. (This was the first notificationthat they had provided to Biological Father regarding the adoption proceeding.) Biological Father signed papersstating that he accepted service and that he was "not contesting the adoption." App. 37. But Biological Fatherlater testified that, at the time he signed the papers, hethought that he was relinquishing his rights to Birth Mother, not to Adoptive Couple.

Biological Father contacted a lawyer the day after signing the papers, and subsequently requested a stay of theadoption proceedings.2 In the adoption proceedings, Biological Father sought custody and stated that he did not consent to Baby Girl’s adoption. Moreover, Biological Father took a paternity test, which verified that he was Baby Girl’s biological father.





Deadbeat POS didn't want to support the kid if the mother was keep it and surrendered his rights, but got pissy when he realized that someone else was willing to do the job for him.
Link Posted: 6/25/2013 8:24:47 AM EST
Originally Posted By R2point0:
I wonder if this can be used to strike the defacto ban on cross racial adoptions that exists in most state's CPS and foster care systems. Social workers would rather let a black child die than let a white couple adopt him.
....or in one case I know of here... 2 white married foster parents picked up the baby at the hospital 2 days after being born. Took three years in the same foster home before the child was up for adoption. And because of a fairly recent law that gives the foster parents first dibs, the white foster parents were finally able to adopt her
Link Posted: 6/25/2013 8:30:01 AM EST
[Last Edit: 6/25/2013 8:32:21 AM EST by gODZOOKIE]
Originally Posted By gODZOOKIE:
Originally Posted By R2point0:
I wonder if this can be used to strike the defacto ban on cross racial adoptions that exists in most state's CPS and foster care systems. Social workers would rather let a black child die than let a white couple adopt him.
....or in one case I know of here... 2 white married foster parents picked up the baby at the hospital 2 days after being born. Took three years in the same foster home before the child was up for adoption. And because of a fairly recent law that gives the foster parents first dibs, the white foster parents were finally able to adopt her
Also, I want to be clear that the social workers in this case were extremely (bent over backwards) helpful...to both birth and foster parents. Ultimately, it all ends up in at the bench, in front of a judge.

Link Posted: 6/25/2013 8:31:51 AM EST

Originally Posted By lostnswv:
Originally Posted By Sykkone:
Originally Posted By LoBrau:
Originally Posted By OKnativeson:
Blood is Blood. Regardless he might be an A1 Chickenshit but that is still his daughter, maybe he had his parental transformation.
who is to say that the father would not turn into a favorable parent? if not the ideal parent for his child.

My Great Grandmother was removed by Indian Agents from her family as a small child in SE Oklahoma and sent to an Indian School in Kansas. You could say that we are jaded at the thought of not just a child being adopted away from a Father that wants them, but also from a Tribal standpoint.

I know alot of people here could care less or not understand our point of view on this.

would you take a child from a Hasidic Jewish family in the same situation and give them to a Baptist?
Nobody TOOK anybody from anybody. The child was given up for adoption at birth, just like any other child who is given up for adoption at birth. Dad didn't want any part of it, and later had (non)buyer's remorse, but since he's more special than any other biological father who may find himself in a similar situation, he gets an automatic do-over with no regard for the welfare of the child? How bizarre.
No more bizarre than your opinion which quite differs from:
Originally Posted By The USSC:
Approximately four months after Baby Girl’s birth,Adoptive Couple served Biological Father with notice ofthe pending adoption. (This was the first notificationthat they had provided to Biological Father regarding the adoption proceeding.) Biological Father signed papersstating that he accepted service and that he was "not contesting the adoption." App. 37. But Biological Fatherlater testified that, at the time he signed the papers, hethought that he was relinquishing his rights to Birth Mother, not to Adoptive Couple.

Biological Father contacted a lawyer the day after signing the papers, and subsequently requested a stay of theadoption proceedings.2 In the adoption proceedings, Biological Father sought custody and stated that he did not consent to Baby Girl’s adoption. Moreover, Biological Father took a paternity test, which verified that he was Baby Girl’s biological father.


Deadbeat POS didn't want to support the kid if the mother was keep it and surrendered his rights, but got pissy when he realized that someone else was willing to do the job for him.

It's quite a different thing to relinquish one's child to it's birth mother (via a text message which contained improper duress), and lose one's child forever to prospective adoptive parents. I'd venture to say that quite a few biological fathers might do some soul searching on that topic... possibly alter some of their life decisions as well. YMMV.
Link Posted: 6/25/2013 8:35:37 AM EST
Originally Posted By Shane333:
Originally Posted By Statman:
The kid is 1.2% Indian. I'm amazed they still use the Indian label.


1.2%?!

By that standard, I could claim that I'm Cherokee.


What are you waiting for - there's tons of free stuff available...
Link Posted: 6/25/2013 8:44:06 AM EST

Originally Posted By R2point0:

I wonder if this can be used to strike the defacto ban on cross racial adoptions that exists in most state's CPS and foster care systems. Social workers would rather let a black child die than let a white couple adopt him.

I hope so.

The 'National Association of Black Social Workers' should die in a fire for that shit.


Link Posted: 6/25/2013 7:03:35 PM EST

Originally Posted By Silence:
link

A South Carolina couple that adopted a Cherokee girl at birth has the right to raise the child regardless of a federal law intended to keep Indian families together, the Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.
In a 5-4 decision, the high court sided with the white couple against a Cherokee Nation member from Oklahoma who claimed the Indian Child Welfare Act gave him the legal right to custody of his daughter, who had been adopted at birth.



There quite the little shitstorm going on the comments on that OK news page you linked... it's turned to genocide down at the bottom...
Top Top