| Abstrakt: |
Haaland v. Brackeen rejected federalism-based challenges to the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) but signaled receptivity to future challenges based on individual rights. The adult-focused rights claims presented in Haaland, however, miss the mark of what is truly problem - atic about ICWA. This Article presents an in-depth, children's-rights based critique of the Act, explaining how it violates a fundamental right against state exertion of power over central aspects of persons' private lives to their den-iment for illicit purposes. In fact, the Act's defenders are complicit in the same sort of government violence that motivated ICWA's enactment-erasing aspects of children's heritage and experience incompatible with a state-preferred identity and destroying children's relationships and worlds in order to transform them in service to ideological and political aims, under the guise of child saving. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
