IN THE MATTER OF M.K.T.
2016 OK 4
| Okla. | 2016Background
- DHS placed S.A.W. (age 2 at removal) in May 2013 with a non-ICWA foster home; Cherokee Nation intervened claiming ICWA applied based on the father's membership.
- For ~9 months DHS searched relatives; tribe later identified an ICWA‑compliant family interested in adoption and requested transfer one year after removal.
- Trial court ordered transfer to the ICWA‑compliant placement with a structured transition; foster mother, parents, State, and child appealed.
- Key factual dispute: emotional attachment and behavioral needs of the child in the current (non‑ICWA) foster home versus the tribe’s placement; father signed a form purporting to relinquish tribal membership.
- Court of Civil Appeals reversed; Oklahoma Supreme Court granted certiorari, vacated the COCA opinion, and issued the present decision remanding with instructions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standard of proof for "good cause" to deviate from ICWA placement preferences | Appellants (State/foster parents/parents) argued abuse‑of‑discretion review applies | Cherokee Nation urged strict protection of tribe interests; higher standard appropriate | Court holds party seeking ICWA‑noncompliant placement must prove good cause by clear and convincing evidence, though here appellants met that standard. |
| Whether appellants met burden to keep child in non‑ICWA foster home (best interests / extraordinary needs) | Appellants: child has serious emotional/separation needs and strong attachment to foster mother; moving would cause trauma | Cherokee Nation: no proof extraordinary needs; tribe’s family could meet needs; ICWA preference controls absent good cause | Court: evidence (therapist, DHS specialist, testimony re attachment) satisfied clear and convincing standard; reversed trial court order requiring ICWA placement. |
| Father's tribal membership / relinquishment effect on ICWA applicability | Appellants: father executed tribal relinquishment; child no longer an "Indian child" so ICWA should not apply | Cherokee Nation: tribe determines membership; record shows father remained enrolled; state courts must accept tribal determination | Court: tribe met burden that child is an Indian child; appellants failed to prove relinquishment effective under Cherokee Nation law; ICWA applicability upheld on record. |
| Interaction of state statute giving "great weight" to one‑year foster parent adoption preference (10A O.S. §1‑4‑812) | Appellants: statutory "great weight" after one year trumps ICWA preference and requires keeping child with foster parent | Cherokee Nation: ICWA placement preferences control federal/state scheme; §1‑4‑812 cannot override ICWA | Court: §1‑4‑812 does not override ICWA preferences; circumstances here do not require reversal based solely on §1‑4‑812. |
Key Cases Cited
- Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians v. Holyfield, 490 U.S. 30 (1989) (ICWA protects child‑tribe relationship; tribal interests can supersede parental consent)
- Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, 436 U.S. 49 (1978) (tribal sovereignty includes power to determine membership)
- United States v. Wheeler, 435 U.S. 313 (1978) (tribes have authority to determine membership absent limiting statute)
- In re M.S., 237 P.3d 161 (Okla. 2010) (Oklahoma Supreme Court: clear‑and‑convincing standard appropriate for "good cause" in transfer to tribal court context)
- In the Matter of Baby Boy L., 103 P.3d 1099 (Okla. 2004) (discusses ICWA purpose and tribal governmental interest in Indian children)