The Indian Child Welfare Act requires that all child welfare proceedings involving Native American children be heard in tribal courts if possible, and tribes may intervene.

• A. All hearings be heard in tribal courts when possible and tribes may intervene
• B. Tribes are not involved in state court proceedings
• C. Federal courts must always hear the cases
• D. Only non-Native children are covered

Answer: (A)

The main idea being tested is how ICWA protects tribal sovereignty in child welfare cases involving Indian children. The law prioritizes tribal court jurisdiction whenever possible, with the goal of keeping proceedings within the tribe's authority and applying tribal standards. It also gives tribes the right to intervene, so they can participate and advocate for the child’s best interests from the tribal perspective. This is why the best answer says hearings should be held in tribal courts when possible and tribes may intervene. It reflects the intention to involve the tribe and to transfer or keep custody matters within tribal jurisdiction whenever feasible. It’s not correct to say tribes are never involved in state court proceedings, because ICWA requires notice to the tribe and often allows or enables tribal participation. It isn’t correct to claim federal courts must always hear these cases, since many ICWA cases proceed in state or tribal courts with specific mechanisms for tribal involvement. And it isn’t correct that only non-Native children are covered—ICWA specifically governs Indian children, defined by their tribal membership or eligibility for membership.