SCOTUS upholds law that assigns child custody on basis of race, putting Christian Texas family at risk of being torn apart: 'Should raise alarm bells'

Under the federal statute's placement preferences, affirmed by the Supreme Court, if an Indian child goes into foster care or up for adoption, "Indian families or institutions from any tribe (not just the tribe to which the child has a tie) outrank unrelated non-Indians or non-Indian institutions. Further, the child's tribe may pass a resolution altering the prioritization order. ... The preferences of the Indian child or her parent generally cannot trump those set by statute or tribal resolution."

While Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who wrote for the majority, recognized that the "issues are complicated," she joined Justices John Roberts, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Ketanji Brown Jackson in rejecting the Brackeens' challenge to the constitutionality of the federal law.

Barrett wrote, "The bottom line is that we reject all of petitioners' challenges to the statute, some on the merits and others for lack of standing."

The majority got things "backwards" in suggesting that petitioners have not borne their burden of showing how Congress exceeded its powers with the ICWA, suggested Thomas, adding the law "lacks any foothold in the Constitution's original meaning."

"When Congress has so clearly intruded upon a longstanding domain of exclusive state powers, we must ask not whether a constitutional provision prohibits that intrusion, but whether a constitutional provision authorizes it," he wrote in his dissenting opinion.

Extra to getting things backwards, the majority, according to Thomas, "gesture to a smorgasbord of constitutional hooks to support ICWA; not one of them works. First, the Indian Commerce Clause is about commerce, not children. ... Second, the Treaty Clause does no work because ICWA is not based on any treaty. Third, the foreign-affairs powers (what the majority terms 'structural principles') inherent in the Federal Government have no application to regulating the domestic child custody proceedings of U.S. citizens within the jurisdiction of States."

Thomas further hinted at the potential for continued and possible wide-reaching abuse, especially since the law applies not just to children who are members of an Indian tribe, but to those who are eligible for membership in a tribe or are children of a tribe member, stating the "ICWA defines 'Indian child' capaciously."

Timothy Sandefur, the vice president for legal affairs at the Goldwater Institute, said, "We’re talking about a law that strips children of legal protections based on their racial ancestry. ... This law, for example, makes it harder for state officials to protect abused and neglected Indian children."

Cherokee Nation principal Chief Chuck Hoskin Jr., Morongo Band of Mission Indians Chairman Charles Martin, Oneida Nation Chairman Tehassi Hill, and Quinault Indian Nation President Guy Capoeman said in a joint statement, "We hope this decision will lay to rest the political attacks aimed at diminishing tribal sovereignty and creating instability throughout Indian law that have persisted for too long."

The New York Times reported that there is uncertainty in the aftermath of the court's decision about the future of one the Brackeens' adopted children.

Thomas Graham, a spokesman for the family, said the Brackeens' 5-year-old daughter "has been part of their family for over four years. ... They wish to say they love Y.R.J. more than words can describe and will continue to fight to adopt her and keep her united with her brother, whom the Brackeens also adopted."

The Associated Press reported that Matthew McGill, who represented the Brackeens at the Supreme Court, intends to press a racial discrimination claim in state court.

"Our main concern is what today’s decision means for the little girl, Y.R.J . — now five years old — who has been a part of the Brackeen family for nearly her whole life. The Court did not address our core claim that ICWA impermissibly discriminates against Native American children and families that wish to adopt them, saying it must be brought in state court," McGill said in a statement.

Meet the Brackeen Familyyoutu.be

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!