University of Colorado Law School students are taking on complex court cases aimed at protecting the well-being of American Indian children and are succeeding in the state's highest courts, says a law professor.
Most recently, students participating in the school's American Indian Law Clinic handled complex trial work and prepared legal briefs in an adoption case heard before the Colorado Supreme Court. The case involved a 10-year-old American Indian boy who has been living under various guardianships since he was an infant.
Jill E. Tompkins, a clinical law professor and director of the American Indian Law Clinic, said the decision put to rest nearly a decade of legal disputes and would finally allow a suitable family to adopt the boy.
"Our students are breaking new legal ground in Colorado and are helping to protect the future of American Indian children, their families and their tribes," Tompkins said. "I am very proud of them."
In its ruling, the state's high court overturned an appeals court decision and ruled that a lower probate court did not exceed its authority or engage in "de facto adoption proceedings" when considering the potential of a prospective guardian to be an adoptive parent. The decision was based, in part, on trial work and briefings prepared by CU law students enrolled in the law clinic.
The boy at the heart of the adoption case is an enrolled member of the Mandan, Hidatsa and Arikara nations, also known as the Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation of North Dakota.
According to court documents, the boy's birth mother placed him in the care of an acquaintance when he was only 10 months old. Since then, he has been under court supervision in Colorado, has lived in various foster homes and allegedly has suffered from physical and emotional abuse. When he was only 4 years old, he underwent treatment for depression, and he struggles with asthma, court documents indicate.
"These cases are emotionally charged and can be gut-wrenchingly sad," Tompkins said. "Our students are committed to advocating for the best interests of Indian children - and their families and their tribes - who need someone to speak up for them and protect their tribal connections."
Ann Rhodes, who graduated from the CU Law School in May and now works as a clerk in the Colorado Court of Appeals, prepared legal briefs and some of the motions on behalf of the boy's tribe for the high court's review of the adoption case.
Although the child's American Indian status and the application of federal Indian law were not the main focus of the case on appeal, Rhodes followed up on the work of previous clinic students to ensure that the boy achieved the best possible outcome, which was important to his tribe.
The experience of applying what she learned in law school to a real-world case with potentially life-changing consequences was invaluable, she said.
"It was very exciting to be part of a real case and a very important issue," Rhodes said. "At the same time it was terrifying because a little boy's life was in the balance."
Rhodes, a former software engineer who sold her own company before entering law school in pursuit of a second, more fulfilling career, credits the American Indian Law Clinic and Tompkins' unfailing support for her success.
Established in 1992, the clinic provides pro bono legal representation to low-income American Indian clients. During a yearlong course, students receive classroom instruction and hands-on experience with American Indian law issues in Colorado.
"Being in a clinic is one of the most important things a law student can do. It allows you to have the experience of working with the law in a way where there's some risk," Rhodes said. "It allows you to have the experience of being a successful lawyer before you actually have to go out and start practicing."
Tompkins called Rhodes' work "outstanding," and said her students currently are involved with two other appellate cases involving the welfare of American Indian children. One involves a contested stepparent adoption and the other will determine the fate of a neglected young girl.
Both cases fall under the federal Indian Child Welfare Act, which the U.S. Congress passed in 1978 in response to the high number of American Indian children being removed from their homes by public and private agencies.
According to the language of federal statute, Congress' intent was to "protect the best interests of Indian children and to promote the stability and security of Indian tribes and families."
To learn more about the CU Law School and the American Indian Law Clinic, visit and .