Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians v. Holyfield
Encyclopedia
Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians v. Holyfield, 490 U.S. 30
(1989), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States
held that the Indian Child Welfare Act
governed adoptions of Indian children, and a tribal court had jurisdiction over a state court regardless of the location of birth of the child if the child or the natural parents resided on the reservation.
passed the Indian Child Welfare Act
(ICWA) , codified at . This law was enacted due to the high rate of Indian Children that were being removed from their families and their tribes, with tribe survival being threatened. The ICWA gives the tribal court exclusive jurisdiction
for children that are born or that live on tribal land, and concurrent jurisdiction
with state courts in all other cases.
In 1985, a set of Indian twins were born in Harrison County
, Mississippi
, 200 miles from the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians
. The mother had moved to Harrison County for the sole purpose of giving birth off the reservation and for placing the children with the Holyfields. The parents were not married, and both parents executed a consent for adoption in the Harrison County Chancery Court and the Holyfields, a non-Indian couple adopted the children. The court signed a final decree of adoption in early 1986. Two months later, the tribe moved to vacate the adoption, stating that the tribal court had exclusive jurisdiction. The state trial court denied their motion, noting that the children had never lived on the reservation and were not born there. The tribe appealed to the Mississippi Supreme Court, which affirmed the trial courts decision. The tribe appealed. The Supreme Court granted certiorari
.
Both of the natural parents resided on the reservation. A child's domicile follows that of the parent. The fact that the parents traveled 200 miles to avoid giving birth on the reservation does not serve to eliminate the tribal court's exclusive jurisdiction. Since the tribal court had such jurisdiction, the state court did not, and had no authority to enter an order of adoption. Reversed and remanded.
and Justice Anthony Kennedy
dissented from the majority opinion. Stevens felt that since the parents consented to the opinion and wanted to use the state court, they should be allowed to do so. Stevens believed that the ICWA was primarily for the involuntary removal of Indian children from their families and the tribe, and a voluntary action does not have the same characteristics. Stevens would have affirmed the decision of the state courts.
involving Indian children, having been cited in over 1,000 cases since the decision. It has also been extensively referenced in books and journals on Native American law.
Although the Supreme Court was clear that the ICWA was to be applied to adoption cases based on the statute and the accompanying House Report, "by making sure that Indian child welfare determinations are not based on "a white, middle-class standard..."", state courts created an "existing Indian family" exception to the application of the ICWA. In those cases, courts had held if the child was not part of an existing Indian family, a term that was not defined anywhere in the law, then the ICWA did not apply. At one point, nearly half of the states used the exception. As of 2010, only six states use the exception. It now appears that tribal interests are being viewed by the courts as importantly as the child's interests in these cases.
Case citation
Case citation is the system used in many countries to identify the decisions in past court cases, either in special series of books called reporters or law reports, or in a 'neutral' form which will identify a decision wherever it was reported...
(1989), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States
Supreme Court of the United States
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all state and federal courts, and original jurisdiction over a small range of cases...
held that the Indian Child Welfare Act
Indian Child Welfare Act
The Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 is a Federal law that governs jurisdiction over the removal of Native American children from their families.-General:...
governed adoptions of Indian children, and a tribal court had jurisdiction over a state court regardless of the location of birth of the child if the child or the natural parents resided on the reservation.
Background
In 1978, CongressUnited States Congress
The United States Congress is the bicameral legislature of the federal government of the United States, consisting of the Senate and the House of Representatives. The Congress meets in the United States Capitol in Washington, D.C....
passed the Indian Child Welfare Act
Indian Child Welfare Act
The Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 is a Federal law that governs jurisdiction over the removal of Native American children from their families.-General:...
(ICWA) , codified at . This law was enacted due to the high rate of Indian Children that were being removed from their families and their tribes, with tribe survival being threatened. The ICWA gives the tribal court exclusive jurisdiction
Exclusive jurisdiction
In civil procedure, exclusive jurisdiction exists where one court has the power to adjudicate a case to the exclusion of all other courts. It is the opposite situation from concurrent jurisdiction, in which more than one court may take jurisdiction over the case.Exclusive jurisdiction is typically...
for children that are born or that live on tribal land, and concurrent jurisdiction
Concurrent jurisdiction
Concurrent jurisdiction exists where two or more courts from different systems simultaneously have jurisdiction over a specific case. This situation leads to forum shopping, as parties will try to have their civil or criminal case heard in the court that they perceive will be most favorable to...
with state courts in all other cases.
In 1985, a set of Indian twins were born in Harrison County
Harrison County, Mississippi
-National protected areas:* De Soto National Forest * Gulf Islands National Seashore - Demographics :As of the census of 2000, there were 189,601 people, 71,538 households, and 48,574 families residing in the county. The population density was 326 people per square mile . There were 79,636 housing...
, Mississippi
Mississippi
Mississippi is a U.S. state located in the Southern United States. Jackson is the state capital and largest city. The name of the state derives from the Mississippi River, which flows along its western boundary, whose name comes from the Ojibwe word misi-ziibi...
, 200 miles from the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians
Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians
The Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians is one of three federally recognized tribes of Choctaw Indians. On April 20, 1945, the tribe organized under the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934. Also in 1945 the Choctaw Indian Reservation was created in Neshoba and surrounding counties...
. The mother had moved to Harrison County for the sole purpose of giving birth off the reservation and for placing the children with the Holyfields. The parents were not married, and both parents executed a consent for adoption in the Harrison County Chancery Court and the Holyfields, a non-Indian couple adopted the children. The court signed a final decree of adoption in early 1986. Two months later, the tribe moved to vacate the adoption, stating that the tribal court had exclusive jurisdiction. The state trial court denied their motion, noting that the children had never lived on the reservation and were not born there. The tribe appealed to the Mississippi Supreme Court, which affirmed the trial courts decision. The tribe appealed. The Supreme Court granted certiorari
Certiorari
Certiorari is a type of writ seeking judicial review, recognized in U.S., Roman, English, Philippine, and other law. Certiorari is the present passive infinitive of the Latin certiorare...
.
Opinion of the Court
Justice William J. Brennan delivered the opinion of the court. Brennan reviewed the intent of Congress and noted that one in eight Indian children were adopted out and that 90% of those children went to non-Indian homes. He noted that for children born or residing on a reservation, the tribal court has exclusive jurisdiction. In other cases, the tribal courts have concurrent jurisdiction. In those cases, on the motion of a parent or the tribe, the matter is to be transferred to the tribal court with three exceptions - for "good cause," objection to the transfer by either parent, or the declination of jurisdiction in the matter by the tribal court. The emphasis the Mississippi Supreme Court placed on the domicile of the children, the fact that they were never on the reservation, and the voluntary relinquishment by the natural parents was error.Both of the natural parents resided on the reservation. A child's domicile follows that of the parent. The fact that the parents traveled 200 miles to avoid giving birth on the reservation does not serve to eliminate the tribal court's exclusive jurisdiction. Since the tribal court had such jurisdiction, the state court did not, and had no authority to enter an order of adoption. Reversed and remanded.
Dissent
Justice John P. Stevens, joined by Chief Justice William RehnquistWilliam Rehnquist
William Hubbs Rehnquist was an American lawyer, jurist, and political figure who served as an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court of the United States and later as the 16th Chief Justice of the United States...
and Justice Anthony Kennedy
Anthony Kennedy
Anthony McLeod Kennedy is an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court, having been appointed by President Ronald Reagan in 1988. Since the retirement of Sandra Day O'Connor, Kennedy has often been the swing vote on many of the Court's politically charged 5–4 decisions...
dissented from the majority opinion. Stevens felt that since the parents consented to the opinion and wanted to use the state court, they should be allowed to do so. Stevens believed that the ICWA was primarily for the involuntary removal of Indian children from their families and the tribe, and a voluntary action does not have the same characteristics. Stevens would have affirmed the decision of the state courts.
Subsequent Developments
The case has had a large impact on family lawFamily law
Family law is an area of the law that deals with family-related issues and domestic relations including:*the nature of marriage, civil unions, and domestic partnerships;...
involving Indian children, having been cited in over 1,000 cases since the decision. It has also been extensively referenced in books and journals on Native American law.
Although the Supreme Court was clear that the ICWA was to be applied to adoption cases based on the statute and the accompanying House Report, "by making sure that Indian child welfare determinations are not based on "a white, middle-class standard..."", state courts created an "existing Indian family" exception to the application of the ICWA. In those cases, courts had held if the child was not part of an existing Indian family, a term that was not defined anywhere in the law, then the ICWA did not apply. At one point, nearly half of the states used the exception. As of 2010, only six states use the exception. It now appears that tribal interests are being viewed by the courts as importantly as the child's interests in these cases.