Skip to comments.
Court strikes down Native American adoption law, saying it discriminates against non-Native...
Washington Post / MSN ^
| October 10, 2018
Posted on 10/10/2018 9:48:37 AM PDT by SMGFan
The landmark law governing adoptions of Native American children, designed to keep them within Native American families, has been struck down as unconstitutional by a federal judge in Texas.
In an Oct. 4 ruling that has stunned Native American rights advocates, U.S. District Judge Reed OConnor found that the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 illegally gives Native American families preferential treatment in adoption proceedings for Native American children based on race, in violation of the Fifth Amendments equal protection guarantee.
Additionally, OConnor ruled that the law violated the 10th Amendments federalism guarantees, specifically the so-called anti-commandeering principle established by the Supreme Court most recently in a 2018 sports gambling case, Murphy v. NCAA et al, which bars Congress from commanding states to modify their laws. In this case, OConnor found that the ICWA offends the structure of the Constitution, since it requires state courts to implement a policy unequivocally dictated by the federal government. The same doctrine has been used by at least two federal courts, in Pennsylvania and California, to block the Trump administrations crackdown on so-called sanctuary cities.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 10thamendment; adoption; anticommandeering; commandeering; grouprights; icwa; illegalimmigration; illegals; indianchildwelfare; karma; murphyvncaa; nativeamericans; ncaa; sanctuarycities; statesrights
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 next last
Any comment Elizabeth Warren?
1
posted on
10/10/2018 9:48:37 AM PDT
by
SMGFan
To: SMGFan
More winning with our new Supreme being there.
2
posted on
10/10/2018 9:55:30 AM PDT
by
Grampa Dave
(Dems @ the Kavanaugh lynching, told the world that non gay men of any color have Zero future w/them!)
To: SMGFan
Murphy v. NCAA et al, which bars Congress from commanding states to modify their laws. In this case, OConnor found that the ICWA offends the structure of the Constitution, since it requires state courts to implement a policy unequivocally dictated by the federal government.
Let’s see which laws would fall under this ‘commanding’ law’s purview
In no particular order:
ethanol usage
marriage rights
abortion
‘gay rights’
organized gambling
and so on.
3
posted on
10/10/2018 9:57:15 AM PDT
by
PIF
(They came for me and mine ... now it is your turn ...)
To: SMGFan
The end of government sanctioned racism - affirmative action- is coming
4
posted on
10/10/2018 9:58:44 AM PDT
by
2banana
(My common ground with terrorists - they want to die for islam and we want to kill them)
To: SMGFan
Sauce for goose must be sauce for gander. Somehow it seems wrong that there can’t be a prioritization if not an ironclad requirement of matching ethnic backgrounds. But oh well. The “liberal” sacred cow just dropped a patty where it wasn’t expected to.
5
posted on
10/10/2018 9:59:05 AM PDT
by
HiTech RedNeck
(Tryin' hard to win the No-Bull Prize.)
To: SMGFan; All
Should say American Indians.A Native American is technically anyone born in the US (though one could argue it could mean anyone born in North, South, or Central America).People use the term as a politically correct term, as in “they were here first and the white man took their land”.
To: SMGFan
Native Americans adopted ONLY by other Native Americans!
Blacks adopted ONLY by other Blacks!
Whites adopted ONLY by other Whites!
Orientals adopted ONLY by other Orientals!
Latinos adopted ONLY by other Latinos!
Left-handed Americans adopted ONLY by other Left-handed Americans!
/s
To: Grampa Dave
Well, Texas court actually.
8
posted on
10/10/2018 12:44:10 PM PDT
by
SMGFan
( .)
To: 2banana
I hope the end of affirmative action is coming————it was unfair from Day One-——even to those it was supposed to help.
.
9
posted on
10/10/2018 12:47:18 PM PDT
by
Mears
To: BwanaNdege
Children of Catholic mothers only to Catholic families...
Children of Satanists only to Satanists...
10
posted on
10/10/2018 12:51:34 PM PDT
by
piasa
(Attitude adjustments offered here free of charge.)
To: Grampa Dave
Then, from past experience, my brain is 236 years old.
11
posted on
10/10/2018 7:05:48 PM PDT
by
gigster
(Cogito, Ergo, Ronaldus Magn us Conservatus)
To: Grampa Dave
Then, from past experience, my brain is 236 years old.
12
posted on
10/10/2018 7:06:20 PM PDT
by
gigster
(Cogito, Ergo, Ronaldus Magn us Conservatus)
To: gigster
Whoooops!!!!! Wrong story.
13
posted on
10/10/2018 7:10:28 PM PDT
by
gigster
(Cogito, Ergo, Ronaldus Magn us Conservatus)
To: raccoonradio
Should say American Indians.A Native American is technically anyone born in the US (though one could argue it could mean anyone born in North, South, or Central America).People use the term as a politically correct term, as in they were here first and the white man took their land.
An American Indian would be someone who moved from these United States to India. A more accurate term would be aboriginal Americans, or perhaps tribal Americans, if you don't know the specific name (Cherokee, Crow, Choctaw, etc.).
To: BwanaNdege
The reason for the law is abuse...children taken from poor dysfunctional families and given to affluent white middle class homes when there were friends or family willing to take them in. A lot of older kids were placed with families with a totally different culture, and a lot of them ended up messed up. Amerindians have a long tradition of adoption,but their wishes to place the children within the tribe was overruled by bossy white social workers. And its not just AmerIndians. After the tv show Different Strokes, a lot of affluent parents wanted to adopt black kids to show they are liberal, not because they wanted to care for a kid, But there was a long tradition in the black community to take in the orpaned kids of friends and family Ditto for white kids of course. But they might not be placed by social workers because the person might be older, single,or lack a separate bedroom for every kid.
Another problem is that adoption agencies run by churches tend to place kids with believers.
I would have to wonder if this was to stop discrimination against gay parents.
15
posted on
10/10/2018 11:41:09 PM PDT
by
LadyDoc
(Liberals only love politically correct poor people)
To: Svartalfiar
You have African-Americans, Irish-Americans, etc.; so, shouldn’t that be “Indian-Americans”?
Feather = American Indian
Dot = Indian-American.
To: LadyDoc
Or perhaps the court recognized that there is no such thing as race.
17
posted on
12/20/2018 11:23:07 PM PST
by
mewzilla
(Break out the mustard seeds.)
To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA
You have African-Americans, Irish-Americans, etc.; so, shouldnt that be Indian-Americans?
Feather = American Indian
Dot = Indian-American.
No. Read my sentence again - I said someone from the US who moved TO India.
Irish-American: Born Ireland, moved to US
Indian-American: Born India, moved to US
American-Irish: Born US, moved to Ireland
American-Indian: Born US, moved to India
Native American: Someone born in the US and raised there.
Native to America: Born in the US, but implies not raised there.
African-American: Born in Africa, moved to US. Almost all US blacks do not fit this!
Your 'feather' people would be best described as tribal Americans, or use their actual names: Cherokee, Crow, Pawnee, Shoshone, Seminole. Ute, Navajo, Apache, Pingon, Shasto, Tawakoni, Kiowa, Tonkawa, Kichai, Caddo, Wichita, Blackfoot, Paiute, etc etc.
To: Svartalfiar
Why don't you take their land and buffalo away while you're at it?
American-Indian: Born US, moved to India
They are so rare one probably don't have to worry about them.
19
posted on
12/21/2018 6:30:00 AM PST
by
x
To: Svartalfiar
I’ve felt compelled to ask several posters to reread something I wrote. Now, it seems I’m the transgressor. How embarassing.
BTW, FWIW, I’m a card-carrying “Aborigional Canadian”; but, I prefer just “Canadian”. With today’s plague of identity politics, we have too much “tribalism”.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson