The California Court of Appeal for the 3rd District issued a ruling in an Indian Child Welfare Act case on Thursday.

The dispute centered over the Karuk Tribe's request to transfer a child welfare case to its court. Siskiyou County objected because the tribal court hasn't been "approved" by the Interior Department.

But in a unanimous decision, the court said federal approval isn't required under ICWA even in a Public Law 280 state like California. "The language and structure ... reflect[s] congressional intent that all tribes, regardless of their 280 status, be able to accept transfer jurisdiction of ICWA cases from state courts," the decision stated.

The ruling come after a recent ICWA decision from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. In another California case, the court said tribes do not have excusive jurisdiction in child welfare cases due to Public Law 280, which grants civil and criminal authority on Indian lands to the state.

The 9th Circuit said ICWA contains a process for a tribe to resume exclusive jurisdiction but that the Elem Tribe hadn't completed it. The California court acknowledged the 9th Circuit's holding but said it didn't apply in the Karuk Tribe's case because the tribe wasn't asserting "exclusive" jurisdiction.

Court Decision:
In re M.A. (March 9, 2006)

Relevant Links:
National Indian Child Welfare Association - http://www.nicwa.org

Related Stories:
Paper concludes series on Indian child welfare (01/06)
Rapid City Journal runs series on Indian child welfare (1/5)
South Dakota panel pressed on Indian child welfare (10/04)
White Earth Band seeks control of child custody case (09/15)
Meskwaki mother decides not to give up baby son (08/26)
Oglala Sioux Tribe seeks role in child welfare case (8/25)
Indian mother gives up son to non-Indian couple (08/15)
Child welfare case handed to Ute Mountain Ute Tribe (8/8)
Meskwaki mother asks tribe not to hold up adoption (07/28)
9th Circuit rules against tribe in California ICWA case (07/20)
Meskwaki mom wants son to go to non-Native family (07/06)
Adopted Navajo child to return home to reservation (06/22)
Wisconsin tribes form child welfare partnership (06/16)
GAO calls for better state data in ICWA cases (04/08)
Failures cited in child abuse on Utah reservation (03/21)
Couple says mother didn't want son in her tribe (03/01)
Hearing slated on custody dispute over Indian boy (02/28)
Yellow Bird: A nation cannot flourish without children (02/01)
Indian mother in South Dakota wants adopted son back (01/31)
Navajo child welfare case sparks legal battle (01/31)
New Mexico infant law said to conflict with ICWA (01/28)
Iowa announces foster care plan for Indian children (11/24)
Alaska opinion backs away from tribal courts (11/01)
Alaska wants to reduce tribal powers in child welfare (09/09)
Fort Peck Tribes sign child welfare agreement (09/07)
Dispute over child welfare contract continues (09/06)
South Dakota Supreme Court supports ICWA case (08/27)
Choctaw Nation helping man in child custody battle (07/06)
Foster care commission seeks tribal inclusion (05/19)
Judge cites ICWA in returning drug addicted baby (03/22)
Native children living in poor, single-parent homes (03/19)
S.D. tribes unhappy with gutting of ICWA bill (02/24)
Bill seeks study of Indian child welfare system in S.D. (02/05)
High rate of Indian adoptions in Iowa protested (01/13)