Summary
The Oklahoma Supreme Court held that the Indian Child Welfare Act applied prospectively to a child-custody proceeding once the child became an Indian child through the mother's enrollment in the Cherokee Nation. The court further held that the State and foster mother failed to establish good cause by clear and convincing evidence to deny transfer of the proceeding to the Cherokee Nation tribal court. The court affirmed the district court's transfer order.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether ICWA applies when the child did not meet the statutory definition of an Indian child when the state proceeding began but became eligible after the child's biological mother enrolled in the Cherokee Nation.
- Whether ICWA applies prospectively from the date the record establishes the child's Indian-child status or instead requires retroactive application to prior proceedings.
- Whether the State established good cause by clear and convincing evidence to deny transfer of the foster-care and parental-rights proceeding to the Cherokee Nation tribal court.
Holdings
- ICWA applies when the record establishes that the child meets the statutory definition of an Indian child, even if the child did not meet that definition when the state proceeding began.
- ICWA applies prospectively from the date the record supports a finding that the child is an Indian child; it does not retroactively invalidate prior orders or proceedings.
- The State failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that good cause existed to retain the proceeding in state court, so transfer to the Cherokee Nation tribal court was proper.
Key quotations
“ICWA applies prospectively to a proceeding when the record establishes the child meets ICWA’s definition of an Indian child.” (at 714)
“The provisions of ICWA become effective in a state child custody proceeding on the date that the record supports a finding that ICWA applies.” (at 715)
“Because the district court did not err in granting the motion to transfer to tribal court, we affirm the order granting the motion to transfer.” (at 717)
Factual background
M.H.C. was placed in DHS protective custody shortly after birth, and the State initially declared ICWA applicable, although the district court later ruled otherwise. The Cherokee Nation repeatedly notified DHS that the child was eligible for tribal enrollment, but the mother was not enrolled until February 5, 2015. After the mother's enrollment made the child an Indian child under ICWA, the Cherokee Nation moved to intervene and transfer the proceeding to tribal court. The district court granted transfer, and the State and foster mother challenged that order without presenting clear and convincing evidence that transfer would harm the child or otherwise establish good cause to deny transfer.
Procedural history
DHS placed M.H.C. in protective custody in November 2013. The district court initially ruled ICWA inapplicable, later entered and vacated a default termination order against the natural mother, and found the mother's parental rights remained intact. After the mother enrolled in the Cherokee Nation and the Cherokee Nation moved to intervene and transfer the proceeding, the district court granted transfer, finding the State had not established good cause by clear and convincing evidence to keep the proceeding in state court.