FEDERAL · 25 U.S.C. · Chapter SUBCHAPTER I—CHILD CUSTODY PROCEEDINGS
Indian tribe jurisdiction over Indian child custody proceedings
25 U.S.C. § 1911
Title25 — Indians
ChapterSUBCHAPTER I—CHILD CUSTODY PROCEEDINGS
This text of 25 U.S.C. § 1911 (Indian tribe jurisdiction over Indian child custody proceedings) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
25 U.S.C. § 1911.
Text
(a)Exclusive jurisdiction
An Indian tribe shall have jurisdiction exclusive as to any State over any child custody proceeding involving an Indian child who resides or is domiciled within the reservation of such tribe, except where such jurisdiction is otherwise vested in the State by existing Federal law. Where an Indian child is a ward of a tribal court, the Indian tribe shall retain exclusive jurisdiction, notwithstanding the residence or domicile of the child.
(b)Transfer of proceedings; declination by tribal court
In any State court proceeding for the foster care placement of, or termination of parental rights to, an Indian child not domiciled or residing within the reservation of the Indian child's tribe, the court, in the absence of good cause to the contrary, shall transfer such p
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Nevada v. Hicks
533 U.S. 353 (Supreme Court, 2001)
Navajo Nation v. State
2012 UT 23 (Utah Supreme Court, 2012)
In Re Christopher Dwayne Larch Frederick Rocky Larch. Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians Frederick Wilfred Larch v. Ina Quinn Larch
872 F.2d 66 (Fourth Circuit, 1989)
IN THE MATTER OF S.J.W.
2023 OK 49 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 2023)
Yancey v. Thomas
441 F. App'x 552 (Tenth Circuit, 2011)
Comanche Indian Tribe of Oklahoma v. Hovis
847 F. Supp. 871 (W.D. Oklahoma, 1994)
Sayers Ex Rel. Sayers v. Beltrami County
481 N.W.2d 547 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1992)
HAMMER v. STATE
2022 OK 80 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 2022)
Roberto F. v. Department of Child Safety
332 P.3d 614 (Court of Appeals of Arizona, 2014)
People in Interest of JLP
870 P.2d 1252 (Colorado Court of Appeals, 1994)
Fresno County Department of Social Services v. Nadine S.
35 Cal. App. 4th 183 (California Court of Appeal, 1995)
Humboldt County Department of Health & Human Services v. Michael T.
154 Cal. App. 4th 897 (California Court of Appeal, 2007)
In Re: Visitation Of J.C.B., K.R.B., L.B.B., And L.A.B.
(Nevada Supreme Court, 2019)
Matter of J.W.C. L.W.C. K.W.C. An
2011 MT 312 (Montana Supreme Court, 2011)
Matter of JM
718 P.2d 150 (Alaska Supreme Court, 1986)
In re D.C. CA1/1
(California Court of Appeal, 2015)
People ex rel. Becerra v. Huber
238 Cal. Rptr. 3d 374 (California Court of Appeals, 5th District, 2018)
In re A.W.E.
2 Am. Tribal Law 222 (Fort Peck Appellate Court, 2000)
In re the Welfare of Walking Eagle
2 Am. Tribal Law 170 (Fort Peck Appellate Court, 2000)
Source Credit
History
(Pub. L. 95–608, title I, §101, Nov. 8, 1978, 92 Stat. 3071.)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
25 U.S.C. § 1911, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/usc/25/1911.