Doe

Mary Doe challenges the State of California’s jurisdiction to terminate her parental rights over her Indian child, Jane Doe, who was domiciled on the Elem Indian Colony reservation at the time she was removed from Mary Doe’s custody by the Lake County Department of Social Services. The case arises under the Indian Child Welfare Act (“ICWA”), which was passed in 1978 to ensure the tribes a role in adjudicating child custody proceedings involving Indian children. P.L, 95-608, codified at 25 U.S.C. §§ 1901-1963 . ICWA provides that tribes will have exclusive jurisdiction over child custody proceedings involving Indian children domiciled or residing on the reservation “except where such jurisdiction is otherwise vested in the State by existing Federal law.” 25 U.S.C. § 1911 (a) (emphasis added). Under one such federal law, 18 U.S.C. § 1162 (a) and 28 U.S.C. § 1360 (a), commonly known as “Public Law .280,” California is vested with broad criminal and certain civil jurisdiction over Indians.

This case presents an issue of first impression for the federal courts, requiring us to reconcile Public Law 280’s grant of certain jurisdiction to the state of California over Indians with the…