Iowa court rules law defining Indian children is too broad
Associated Press - November 30, 2007 11:44 AM ET
DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) - The Iowa Supreme Court ruled Friday a state law defining who qualifies as an Indian child violates federal and state constitutions.
The court, in ruling whether the Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska may intervene in the parental custody case of 2 children, concluded a 2003 state law exceeded the limits of governmental power in Indian affairs. The law includes the definition of Indian children as those of mixed blood who are not eligible for tribal membership, exceeding the limits of governmental power in Indian affairs.
The court says Iowa and Washington are the only states with broader definitions of Indian child than the federal government.
The court says Iowa's overinclusive law amounts to a racial classification that violates the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause and the Iowa Constitution's similar protections.
[No doubt there is much more to the details of this case, however, I would like to point out a few things here.This is a legalized act of gencoide, specifically, forcible transferral of children from one group another.
The reason the Indian Child Welfare Act was put into place was because the U.S. was kidnapping Indian children and forcing them into boarding schools where they beaten, systematically raped, tortured, imprisoned, and often murdered for things like...speaking their own language. ICWA was put in place as an attempt to use the system to stop the U.S. governments continued genocide against indgenous peoples. Indian children were often adopted to non-indian folks in order to systematically de-Indianize these children. Children were often beaten, raped, tortured and otherwise abused in these adoptive situations as well. I have a friend who was adopted to white folks and was repeatedly raped by her adopted brother and often held in prison via a closet for days at times. That is why ICWA has been put in place, to protect indigenous children from the continued U.S. systematic genocide.
Now this leads to how are Indians defined. Indians, unlike Americans, are NOT ALLOWED to define who is and isn't Indian. The states and the U.S. government have given themselves that "problem to be solved." This is a direct challenge to sovereignty. The U.S. will intervene on certain cases of identity but not on others. It all depends on how it is convenient to them. In this case, it is convenient to the U.S. to decide who is and isn't Indian, because if Indians are allowed that authority, the U.S. couldn't dominate them and discriminate, nor continue using its kinder/gentler hand of genocide against indigenous peoples. Why does the U.S. want to continue the genocide against indigenous folks? Let's see....
Indigenous folks are the true property owners of all of this land. All the resources that have been stolen to create great wealth for the already wealthy were stolen from Indian lands. Trading in stolen properties is a crime. And since the U.S. is an illegal nation illegally occupying Indian lands, the Indians have to be SPECIALLY OPPRESSED in order that they no longer have the will to fight back or that their fight might be ineffective against the genocidal oppressor and their continued illegal occupation of indigenous lands and genocide of the folks there of. Part of the way to continue the oppression is to decide who is and isn't Indian and enforce that upon Indians. Indians are not allowed to make a move without U.S. permission.
This case, and so many others like it, play right into the hands of the occupiers and genocidal maniacs currently known as The United States.
REVOLUTION NOW!]
|