A Tale of Tribe and Family : A Look at Opposing Thoughts on the ICWA through the Court Case Brackeen v. Haaland.

The Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) was passed in the year 1978 as a solution to the overwhelming amount of Native American children being removed from their homes and families by both public and private organizations (). It is approximated that between 75-80% of families living on reservations had lost at least one child to the foster care system prior to the passing of the ICWA (). The ICWA is in place today to prevent Native children from being raised away from their culture, which is known to be a major contributor to these cultures ultimately fading away. The following essay will discuss Chad and Jennifer Brackeen’s family interview with their attorney, and their challenge to the ICWA on the basis that it is unconstitutional and discriminatory, and compare it to the thoughts of Shannon Smith, the Executive Director of the ICWA Law Center in Minneapolis. The discussion will follow how the Brackeens use narrative and classical arguments, emotional appeals, and syntax/tone in their case to challenge the ICWA. Additionally, the discussion will analyze Smith’s logical application and classical argument for upholding this act for the continuation of tribal sovereignty, and then compare her argument’s …show more content…
This fact alone speaks to their ability to handle sensitive situations when it comes to fostering children. Overall, their personal experience can both add to and take away from their argument depending on who their audience may be, which in the case of Haaland v. Brackeen, was a majoritively conservative Supreme Court. This may be why they leaned into the fact that they are a religious family and hold traditional core family