Discover and read the best of Twitter Threads about #brackeen
Most recents (11)
The U.S. Supreme Court also has issued the long-awaited decision in Haaland v. Brackeen. #ICWA #DefendICWA #ProtectICWA
supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf…
supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf…
The Haaland v. Brackeen has been one of the most closely watched Indian law cases in recent history. At stake is the Indian Child Welfare Act, the gold standard in child welfare law and the law that recognizes that tribes have a say in the futures of their children. #ICWA
The decision in Haaland v. Brackeen is noticeably complex. The entire document, including the syllabus, opinion, concurring opinions and dissent totals 133 pages. #ICWA #DefendICWA #ProtectICWA
After some cringe-worthy coverage from non-Native outlets, here is a run down of Native journalists covering last week’s #scotus oral arguments in Haaland v #Brackeen.
@jourdanbb & @Pdineclah covered protests outside #SCOTUS for @IndianCountry
indiancountrytoday.com/news/indigenou…
@jourdanbb & @Pdineclah covered protests outside #SCOTUS for @IndianCountry
indiancountrytoday.com/news/indigenou…
And here is video of Wednesday’s rally at #scotus from @ndncollective.
ndncollective.org/video-ndn-coll…
ndncollective.org/video-ndn-coll…
.@180099native hosted an analysis and reflection on the oral arguments with Matthew Fletcher (Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians), Suzette Brewer (citizen of the Cherokee Nation), and Dr. Sarah Kastelic (Alutiiq)
nativeamericacalling.com/thursday-novem…
nativeamericacalling.com/thursday-novem…
During the #SCOTUS oral argument in #Brackeen several Justices seemed to think #ICWA takes Native children from foster parents they attached to & that’s bad.
So here’s a list of every time the foster parents in this case moved a foster kid or fought for a kid to be moved:
So here’s a list of every time the foster parents in this case moved a foster kid or fought for a kid to be moved:
We’ll start with the Brackeens.
The first child they ever fostered was not an ICWA case bc the kid was not Native. After 5 months, they asked CPS to take the child back bc the 3 yr old was “difficult” and “suffocating”.
The first child they ever fostered was not an ICWA case bc the kid was not Native. After 5 months, they asked CPS to take the child back bc the 3 yr old was “difficult” and “suffocating”.
In 2019, when the Brackeens fought for and got custody of YRJ the child was a year old. She had been raised the first year of her life by a different Texas foster family, who was willing to adopt her. At the time they got custody, she was not being raised by the Brackeens.
As an Indigenous attorney from the global South, I choose to wake up in the “iron cold” of Federal Indian Law and fight for basic human rights to apply to Indigenous Peoples. Even so, it’s crushing to hear #Brackeen as #GibsonDunn attempts to erode #ICWA and #TribalSovereignty.🧵
I’ve litigated #ICWA cases with @BenRundallEsq in AZ, and even in a state with 22 federally recognized Tribes, it was abundantly clear that courts aren’t competent to respect protections meant to remedy the historical wrongs of taking Indigenous children away from their families.
*taps mic*
Good morning!
@AngryBlackLady here live-tweeting the arguments in #BrackeenVHaaland, the case that demonstrates there's nothing white folks won't complain about when they don't get their way. They want native children and by George, they'll have them, ICWA be damned!
Good morning!
@AngryBlackLady here live-tweeting the arguments in #BrackeenVHaaland, the case that demonstrates there's nothing white folks won't complain about when they don't get their way. They want native children and by George, they'll have them, ICWA be damned!
The case is more than about the white supremacist urge to steal Native children from their homes and assimilate them, thereby severing their ties to their tribes.
It's also about ending tribal sovereignty. "Native American" is a political designation that means something.
It's also about ending tribal sovereignty. "Native American" is a political designation that means something.
But the Brackeens and the state of Texas want "Native American" to be a racial classification so they can complain that the Indian Child Welfare Act unfairly prioritizes Native American people in the placement of Native foster children.
The #Brackeen case, and the money behind their litigation efforts, highlight what many in Indian Country already knew:
First they come for our people, and then they come for our lands. If there are no tribal people, then there are no land obligations due to tribal communities.
First they come for our people, and then they come for our lands. If there are no tribal people, then there are no land obligations due to tribal communities.
And if there are no children in tribal communities, then, the thought is, that tribal communities will cease to exist, only in books and memory.
Real interesting when you see how big oil companies are behind the big picture aims of ending ICWA.
It is bigger than just this case.
Real interesting when you see how big oil companies are behind the big picture aims of ending ICWA.
It is bigger than just this case.
In Indian Country, we have seen this same plan and ideology shape shift over generations and centuries, culminating with “kill the Indian, save the man” policies, like indentured servitude by white families, boarding schools and forced assimilation.
ICWA is critical.
ICWA is critical.
🚨Good Morning!! Pre-Argument 🧵 3 of 3 explaining the constitutional challenges to #ICWA that #SCOTUS will hear today in Haaland v. #Brackeen: Anti-Commandeering. 1/7
This challenge is about state’s power. The idea, from the structure of the Constitution and the 10th Amendment, is that Congress has limited power, & can’t interfere with powers that belong to States. 2/7
Congress can pass laws preempting (trumping) state law, but they can’t make state officials do stuff to enforce federal law. Congress can make it illegal to buy certain kinds of firearms, for example, but they can’t force state officials to run background checks. 3/7
🚨Good Morning!! Pre-Argument 🧵 2 of 3 explaining the constitutional challenges to #ICWA that #SCOTUS will hear today in Haaland v. #Brackeen: Article 1/Congressional Power. 1/16
Congress can only pass a law if the Constitution gives them the authority to pass that type of law. Congress must "have the power" to pass a law, or else the whole law is unconstitutional, & so are all the other laws of that type. 2/16
So it matters a ton what types of laws the Constitution says Congress can pass. In #Brackeen, whether Congress can pass a law that aims to keep Indian children with their families, communities, & culture. 3/16
🚨Good Morning!! Pre-Argument 🧵 1 of 3 explaining the constitutional challenges to #ICWA that #SCOTUS will hear today in Haaland v. #Brackeen: The Equal Protection Clause (EPC). 1/14
The EPC of the 14th Amendment (w/ Due Process Clause of 5th) guarantee equal protection of the law, no matter who you are. #SCOTUS interprets this not to prohibit laws that treat categories of people differently but says laws are disfavored if they target disfavored groups. 2/14
The more disfavored the group, the more scrutiny we apply to the law. Or that's how it started. Now we look at certain kinds of classes of categorizing people as more suspect--like racial classifications--even when they target the majority group. 3/14
Tomorrow, SCOTUS is hearing #BrackeenvHaaland. It’s a travesty. We are on the cusp of a legitimate cultural genocide where Native children will be stripped of their heritage in favor of white middle class standards. It’s white grievance on steroids. Don’t believe me?
Read this:
Read this:
Texas is legitimately arguing that ICWA is unconstitutional because it prevents Native children from being raised according to white middle class standards.
That’s literally their argument.
#Brackeen is about more than just the adoption of this one baby. It’s about genocide.
That’s literally their argument.
#Brackeen is about more than just the adoption of this one baby. It’s about genocide.
Tomorrow, @Hegemommy and I are going live after oral arguments to talk about #Brackeen. Please join us!
Happy #IndigenousPeoplesDay! "Conservative" advocates before the Supreme Court are challenging federal Indian law as unconstitutional. Friendly reminder that #originalism means #landback. It means Native people get Louisiana and everything west. 1/
justsecurity.org/83460/on-indig…
justsecurity.org/83460/on-indig…
The framing generation never envisioned treaty or territory powers able to incorporate huge new swathes of land and peoples. Only those peoples in the map consented to and ratified the constitution. Want to stretch the US from sea to shining sea? Amend the Constitution. 2/
No amendment? Then #originalism means that we cannot constitutionally hold those lands or peoples as part of the United States. Not just that, but Hawai'i, Alaska, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, &c. All gone. This isn't realistic, you say. 3/
