Revised Code of Washington
Wash. Rev. Code § 13.38.080 (2026)
Transfer of jurisdiction
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) In any proceeding for the foster care placement of, or termination of parental rights to, an Indian child who is not domiciled or residing within the reservation of the Indian child's tribe, the court shall, in the absence of good cause to the contrary, transfer the proceeding to the jurisdiction of the Indian child's tribe, upon the motion of any of the following persons:
(a) Either of the child's parents;
(b) The child's Indian custodian;
(c) The child's tribe; or
(d) The child, if age twelve or older.
The transfer shall be subject to declination by the tribe. The tribe shall have seventy-five days to affirmatively respond to a motion or order transferring jurisdiction to the tribal court. A failure of the tribe to respond within the seventy-five day period shall be construed as a declination to accept transfer of the case.
(2) If the child's tribe has not formally intervened, the moving party shall serve a copy of the motion and all supporting documents on the tribal court to which the moving party seeks transfer.
(3) If either of the Indian child's parents objects to transfer of the proceeding to the Indian child's tribe, the court shall not transfer the proceeding.
(4) Following entry of an order transferring jurisdiction to the Indian child's tribe:
(a) Upon receipt of an order from a tribal court accepting jurisdiction, the state court shall dismiss the child custody proceeding without prejudice.
(b) Pending receipt of such tribal court order, the state court may conduct additional hearings and enter orders which strictly comply with the requirements of the federal Indian child welfare act and this chapter. The state court shall not enter a final order in any child custody proceeding, except an order dismissing the proceeding and returning the Indian child to the care of the parent or Indian custodian from whose care the child was removed, while awaiting receipt of a tribal court order accepting jurisdiction, or in the absence of a tribal court order or other formal written declination of jurisdiction.
(c) If the Indian child's tribe declines jurisdiction, the state court shall enter an order vacating the order transferring jurisdiction and proceed with adjudication of the child custody matter in strict compliance with the federal Indian child welfare act, this chapter, and any applicable tribal-state agreement.
[ 2011 c 309 s 8.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2
cases, 2017–2017 · leading case: In re the Parental Rights to: T.T. (Wash. Ct. App. 2017).
In Re The Dependency Of: B.m.a., Dob 10/26/08 Seth Gladstone, App v. Dshs, Resp (Wash. Ct. App. 2017). “75404-1-1 /20 RCW 13.38.080(2).10 He concedes those Acts grant any parent the power to veto a transfer to tribal court and that "[a] trial court therefore errs when it transfers jurisdiction over a parental veto.”
In re the Parental Rights to: T.T. (Wash. Ct. App. 2017). “§ 1912 (a); see also RCW 13.38.080(1). DSHS responds that there is no evidence that T.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 13.38.080(1) — 1 case
In re the Parental Rights to: T.T. (Wash. Ct. App. 2017). “§ 1912 (a); see also RCW 13.38.080(1). DSHS responds that there is no evidence that T.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 13.38.080(2) — 1 case
In Re The Dependency Of: B.m.a., Dob 10/26/08 Seth Gladstone, App v. Dshs, Resp (Wash. Ct. App. 2017). “75404-1-1 /20 RCW 13.38.080(2).10 He concedes those Acts grant any parent the power to veto a transfer to tribal court and that "[a] trial court therefore errs when it transfers jurisdiction over a parental veto.”
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.