Haaland v. Brackeen

Brief Filed: 8/22
Court: U.S. Supreme Court
Year of Decision: 2023

Read full-text amicus brief (PDF, 229KB)opens in new window

(1) Is the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) of 1978 within the scope of Congress’s Article I powers to “regulate commerce with... the Indian Tribes”? (2) In considering whether the act violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, should the act’s preferences for the placement of Native American children in custody cases, adoptions, and foster care into Native American families be reviewed under a strict scrutiny standard (i.e., based on race) or a rational basis standard (i.e., politically-based)? (3) Are certain provisions of the act in violation of the U.S. Constitution's non-commandeering and nondelegation clauses by requiring the states to fulfill federal policy goals and by wholly delegating legislative authority to other actors, respectively?

Child Custody/Adoption

The plaintiffs sued in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas challenging ICWA’s constitutionality. Regarding issues relevant to the APA’s brief, the district court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, finding the placement preferences were a form of racial discrimination in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. The decision was reversed on appeal by a three-judge panel from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and affirmed by a review en banc by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Both plaintiffs and defendants petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari, which the Court granted in February of 2022.

APA, joined by the Society of Indian Psychologists and the Texas, Indiana, and Louisiana Psychological Associations, submitted a brief showing the act’s placement preferences were rationally related to the legitimate government purpose—namely, in acting in the best interest of the child. The brief cited a large body of research indicating that the placement of a Native American child with Native American families promotes healthy psychological development (e.g., greater self-esteem, decreased substance misuse), while placing Native American children with non-Native American families significantly increases the risk for Native American children to experience a number of adverse outcomes (e.g., greater rates of suicide). APA's brief provided the court with research on the various psychological principles that are unique to Native American children and families, including theories related to identity development and confusion, enculturation, historical trauma, and resilience.

On June 15, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Indian Child Welfare Act as a valid exercise of Congress’s power. The court cited to precedent supporting the notion that Congress has the plenary and exclusive power to create legislation regarding Native American tribes and can override states in adoption proceedings for Indian children. The Supreme Court also rejected the petitioners’ non-commandeering and nondelegation challenges arising from Supremacy Clause, and because the relevant provisions do not apply exclusively to state actors, determined that the parties did not have standing for their other ICWA challenges regarding placement preferences. APA was cited in Justice Gorsuch’s concurring opinion to emphasize that research shows that it is generally in Native American children’s best interest to be raised in Native American households.