Adoption and the Indian Child Welfare Act
Although major cases involving gay marriage have grabbed most of the headlines in recent weeks, the Supreme Court of the United States handed down yet another important family law case at the end of this year’s term. In Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl, 570 U.S. ___ (2013), the Court held in a 5-4 decision that Sections 1912(d) and 1912(f) of the Indian Child Welfare Act do not apply in situations where a parent has never had custody of his child. This reversed a South Carolina Supreme Court decision and remanded an already protracted adoption and custody dispute for still more proceedings in state court.
The facts of the case are mostly undisputed. Baby Girl’s parents, who lived about four hours away from each other, became engaged in December 2008. About a month later, Birth Mother (who is “predominantly Hispanic”) informed Birth Father (a member of the Cherokee Nation) that she was pregnant. The relationship went downhill thereafter, apparently at least partly because the couple differed over what to do next: Birth Father wanted to move up the wedding and refused to provide financial support until after the marriage while Birth Mother did not agree to this and broke off the engagement in May,2009. In June of that year, Birth Mother sent a text message to Birth Father, asking if he preferred relinquishing his parental rights or paying child support, and he texted back that he would rather give up his rights. It is undisputed that Birth Father provided no financial or other support to the mother or baby during the pregnancy or during the four months after Baby Girl was born.


The day after the dreadful attacks of September 11, 2001, the French newspaper Le Monde published an editorial under the headline “Nous Sommes Tous Américains” (“We Are All Americans”). The headline was meant to convey not only that the French people stood behind Americans in our desperate hour, but also that they shared our vulnerability as well as our responsibility in an increasingly dangerous world. The editorial warned that modern technology enables suicidal warriors of all ideological stripes to do more damage than ever before, and the writer emphasized that all leaders need to act to discourage ordinary people from joining the murderous aims of warmongers like those who wreaked havoc on September 11th.