INDIGENOUS

CONSTITUTIONAL & INDIGENOUS LAW EXPERT MARVIN MORALESCOMMENTARY ON THE IMPACT TO INDIGENOUS RIGHTSUPON THE PARTIAL REVERSAL OF MCGIRT

[IDIOMA ESPAÑOL DISPONIBLE AL FINAL]


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE


HEADLINE: “Ethics Expert Wonders Whether Justice Would Enjoy Wife’s Honey Flan”


JUNE 29, 2022


(SAN ANTONIO, TX) MARVIN MORALES, Constitutional & Indigenous Tribal Law expert and
licensed Texas lawyer comments and shares his opinions and expertise on today’s decision
in Castro-Huerta to narrow rights of indigenous tribes under the McGirt ruling issued by
the U.S. Supreme Court:


Direct Quote.
—-
“In sum, the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) recognizes Tribes have exclusive sovereignty
and jurisdiction over their members who reside on their land. It ultimately recognizes
Indigenous Tribes are in the best position to determine what is in the best interest of Tribal
children. Apparently, today, under its ruling in Castro-Huerta, the then 5-year-old child, who
is a Cherokee Indian, was not entitled to protections afforded under ICWA.


“For it not to be the case, Castro-Huerta would not have reverted to the default pointed out
by the court.


“The default is that States have criminal jurisdiction in Indian country
unless that jurisdiction is preempted. And that jurisdiction has not been
preempted here.” Castro-Huerta.


“Left unanswered: When did the State of Oklahoma obtain personal jurisdiction of the child
victim in this case if not by the consent of Tribal law? In other words, why can Oklahoma
prosecute a person for a victim that is only considered to reside in Oklahoma because
Tribal law GRANTED Oklahoma that right. Would it seem weird to anyone else if, say, the
State of Texas prosecuted a person who committed a crime in Virginia simply because the
perpetrator was a resident of Texas. Does due process not require the court in a better
position to evaluate the best interest of the child—for that matter, any issue related to the
child’s welfare.“


“In my opinion, a better resolution would have been to simply send it back to the Tribes to
decide whether to grant States the same criminal jurisdiction already found on the civil
side. Were that the outcome, Tribes would not be put in a position to race to the
courthouse to prosecute or defend its sovereignty against the States.”


“More troublesome, though, in my opinion, is the unwillingness of the Court to uphold the
Common Law principle of stare decisis for which our country’s judiciary was founded.
Indeed, it seems for a group priding themselves on originalism they ought to know the
history and principles of the Common Law.”


“Instead, the primary determining factor is the personal opinions and biases of the Court’s
individual members. The floodgates were opened after Roe v. Wade. No longer is precedent
or stare decisis the law of the land because the better indicator of how the Supreme Court
will rule is based on the personal politics and beliefs of each individual Justices.”


“It was only a few years ago the Country lost Justice Ginsburg. It was also her vote cast in
McGirt which gave rise to this appeal. It now seems predictable that the acts and events
giving rise to the Court’s current composition have transformed our country’s legal system
to one of arbitrary. By arbitrary, I really mean whatever the majority justices personally feel
about an issue.”


“In Texas, token gifts to judges are allowable so long as it is an item that has a value of
less than $50, excluding cash or negotiable instruments, and if it was not given in
exchange for any official exercise of the official. To that end, I wonder if Justice Barrett
would enjoy my wife’s famous honey flan?” —- End Quote.


Mr. Morales is available for further commentary or guest interviews in either English or
Spanish language. Direct media requests to: Email: marvinmoraleslaw@gmail.com Twitter:
@Marvin11Morales Phone: (210) 605-0682


EXECUTIVE BIO: Marvin Morales is a practicing San Antonio attorney and alumnus of the
University of Texas at Austin (BA-Psychology) and St. Mary’s University (J.D./ M.B.A.). Mr.
Morales is an expert in judicial ethics law and past pupil of St. Mary’s professor and
nationally acclaimed ethics expert, Vincent R. Johnson. Marvin counts constitutional law as
his favorite specialty.


End Media and Press Release

Share your love
Christophe Rude

Christophe Rude

Articles: 15888

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *