(1) An Indian tribe shall have jurisdiction exclusive as to this state over any child custody proceeding involving an Indian child who resides or is domiciled within the reservation of such tribe, except when such jurisdiction is otherwise vested in the state by existing federal law. When an Indian child is a ward of a tribal court, the Indian tribe shall retain exclusive jurisdiction, notwithstanding the residence or domicile of the child.
(2) In any state court proceeding for the foster care placement of, or termination of parental rights to, an Indian child not domiciled or residing within the reservation of the Indian child's tribe, the court, in the absence of good cause to the contrary, shall transfer such proceeding to the jurisdiction of the primary tribe, absent objection by either parent, upon the petition of either parent or the Indian custodian or the Indian child's tribe, except that such transfer shall be subject to declination by the tribal court of the primary tribe.
(3) In any state court proceeding for the foster care placement of, or termination of parental rights to, an Indian child, the Indian custodian of the child and the Indian child's tribe or tribes shall have a right to intervene at any point in the proceeding regardless of whether the intervening party is represented by legal counsel. The Indian child's tribe or tribes and their counsel are not required to associate with local counsel or pay a fee to appear pro hac vice in a child custody proceeding under the Nebraska Indian Child Welfare Act. Representatives from the Indian child's tribe or tribes have the right to fully participate in every court proceeding held under the act.
(4) If the Indian child is eligible for membership or enrolled in multiple Indian tribes and more than one Indian tribe intervenes in a state court proceeding for the foster care placement of, or termination of parental rights to, an Indian child, the Indian child's primary tribe shall be determined in the following manner:
(a) The applicable Indian tribes shall enter into a unanimous agreement designating which Indian tribe is the Indian child's primary tribe for the underlying state court proceeding within thirty days after intervention by one or more additional Indian tribes, after consultation, if practicable, with the parents of the Indian child and with the Indian child if he or she is twelve years of age or older; or
(b) If unanimous agreement is not possible within the thirty-day period, the state court in which the proceeding is pending shall determine the Indian child's primary tribe based upon the amount and significance of the contacts between each Indian tribe and the Indian child.
(5) The State of Nebraska shall give full faith and credit to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of any Indian tribe applicable to Indian child custody proceedings to the same extent that the state gives full faith and credit to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of any other entity.
Notes of Decisions
In Re Interest of Dakota L., 712 N.W.2d 583 (Neb. Ct. App. 2006).
· cites it 10× “§ 1911 (a) (2000) of the federal ICWA and under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-1504 (1) (Reissue 2004) of the Nebraska ICWA.”
In re Interest of Tavian B., 874 N.W.2d 456 (Neb. 2016).
· cites it 4× “At the time this case com- menced, § 43-1504 provided: (2) In any state court proceeding for the foster care placement of, or termination of parental rights to, an Indian child not domiciled or residing within the reserva- tion of the Indian child’s tribe, the court, in the…”
In re Interest of Ricardo T., 999 N.W.2d 562 (Neb. 2024).
· cites it 11× “§ 1911 (a) of ICWA and § 43-1504(1) of NICWA (providing that tribes have exclusive jurisdiction over child custody proceeding involving “Indian child” who is domiciled or residing within tribe’s reservation or who is ward of tribal court).”
In Re Interest of Lawrence H., 743 N.W.2d 91 (Neb. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 5× “[7-9] Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-1504 (2) (Reissue 2004) provides: In any state court proceeding for the foster care placement of, or termination of parental rights to, an Indian child not domiciled or residing within the reservation of the Indian child's tribe, the court, in the…”
State v. Shannon P., 709 N.W.2d 676 (Neb. Ct. App. 2006).
· cites it 3× “The record reveals that Shannon was notified of the applicability of the ICWA and that the tribe intervened and sought transfer of the case under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-1504 (2) and (3) (Reissue 2004).”
Carson P. ex rel Foreman v. Heineman, 240 F.R.D. 456 (D. Neb. 2007).
· cites it 2× “Neb.Rev.Stat. § 43-1504(LEXIS 2005). Under NICWA, attempts must be made to secure foster and adoptive placement of Native American children in Native American homes or institutions.”
In Re Interest of JLM, 451 N.W.2d 377 (Neb. 1990).
· cites it 3× “§ 1911 (b) and § 43-1504(2). Apparently, the tribe and Judge Joseph believed that K.”
In Re Interest of CW, 479 N.W.2d 105 (Neb. 1992).
· cites it 2× “Both Neb.Rev.Stat. § 43-1504(2) (Reissue 1988) and 25 U.”
In Re Interest of Brittany C., 693 N.W.2d 592 (Neb. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 2× “We recognize that pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-1504 (3) (Reissue 2004), an Indian child’s tribe has the right to intervene at any point in a state court proceeding for the foster care placement of, or termination of parental rights to, that Indian child.”
In Re Interest of Louis S., 774 N.W.2d 416 (Neb. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 2× “Section 43-1504 states in part: (2) In any state court proceeding for the foster care placement of, or termination of parental rights to, an Indian child not domiciled or residing within the reservation of the Indian child's tribe, the court, in the absence of good cause to the…”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-1504(1) — 2 cases
In Re Interest of Dakota L., 712 N.W.2d 583 (Neb. Ct. App. 2006).
“§ 1911 (a) (2000) of the federal ICWA and under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-1504 (1) (Reissue 2004) of the Nebraska ICWA.”
In re Interest of Ricardo T., 999 N.W.2d 562 (Neb. 2024).
“§ 1911 (a) of ICWA and § 43-1504(1) of NICWA (providing that tribes have exclusive jurisdiction over child custody proceeding involving “Indian child” who is domiciled or residing within tribe’s reservation or who is ward of tribal court).”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-1504(2) — 7 cases
In re Interest of Ricardo T., 999 N.W.2d 562 (Neb. 2024).
“§ 1911 (a) of ICWA and § 43-1504(1) of NICWA (providing that tribes have exclusive jurisdiction over child custody proceeding involving “Indian child” who is domiciled or residing within tribe’s reservation or who is ward of tribal court).”
In Re Interest of Dakota L., 712 N.W.2d 583 (Neb. Ct. App. 2006).
“§ 1911 (a) (2000) of the federal ICWA and under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-1504 (1) (Reissue 2004) of the Nebraska ICWA.”
In Re Interest of JLM, 451 N.W.2d 377 (Neb. 1990).
“§ 1911 (b) and § 43-1504(2). Apparently, the tribe and Judge Joseph believed that K.”
In Re Interest of Lawrence H., 743 N.W.2d 91 (Neb. Ct. App. 2007).
“[7-9] Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-1504 (2) (Reissue 2004) provides: In any state court proceeding for the foster care placement of, or termination of parental rights to, an Indian child not domiciled or residing within the reservation of the Indian child's tribe, the court, in the…”
In Re Interest of CW, 479 N.W.2d 105 (Neb. 1992).
“Both Neb.Rev.Stat. § 43-1504(2) (Reissue 1988) and 25 U.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-1504(3) — 2 cases
In re Interest of Ricardo T., 999 N.W.2d 562 (Neb. 2024).
“§ 1911 (a) of ICWA and § 43-1504(1) of NICWA (providing that tribes have exclusive jurisdiction over child custody proceeding involving “Indian child” who is domiciled or residing within tribe’s reservation or who is ward of tribal court).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.