IE 11 is not supported. For an optimal experience visit our site on another browser.
  • UP NEXT

    #VelshiBannedBookClub: “Two Boys Kissing” by David Levithan

    06:32
  • Ret. Police Captain: ‘There’s no idea of due process’ if cops determine justice 

    04:59
  • Paul Butler: “This is warrior policing on steroids”

    06:30
  • Adm. Stavridis: “Putin owns this problem”

    05:44
  • Velshi: Despite ALL the warnings about fossil fuel, we're going the wrong way

    04:37
  • On 50th anniversary of Roe, abortion providers reflect on what’s changed since Dobbs

    10:29
  • View from Finland: Misinformation fight begins with education

    07:25
  • Nancy Northup: 50th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade is “a day of mixed emotions”

    07:40
  • #VelshiBannedBookClub: Grace Lin’s “A Big Mooncake for Little Star”

    09:24
  • Fmr. Estonian President on Estonia’s “more aid faster” approach to Ukraine

    05:36
  • Top Ukrainian Defense official says battle tanks are key to defeating Russia

    06:15
  • As abortion pills become easier to get, Republicans push back in draconian ways

    08:13
  • “The debt ceiling is going to have to be increased,” says GOP Rep. Bacon

    05:51
  • Debating the validity of the Electoral College

    06:33
  • Fmr. Rep. Fred Upton: ‘You’re not going to balance a budget overnight,’ debt ceiling should be raised

    07:07
  • Velshi: George Santos & the death of shame 

    05:16
  • Velshi: GOP is playing with U.S. prosperity in fight over debt ceiling

    04:52
  • #VelshiBannedBookClub: “Their Eyes Were Watching God” by Zora Neale Hurston

    09:34
  • Fmr Congressmen on House GOP’s score-settling and “narrative of grievance”

    08:46
  • Britain's PM condemns Iran's execution of British-Iranian national

    01:09

The Supreme Court case that could wipe out indigenous sovereignty in the U.S.

08:03

The Supreme Court is hearing arguments in a high-stakes case about indigenous children and culture. On the surface, the case known as Brackeen v. Haaland revolves around a dispute over whether a non-native family can adopt a native baby. At the heart of the case is the Indian Child Welfare Act, a law passed in 1978 that says if a state determines a Native child must be legally removed from their home, they must be placed with an American Indian family or, if possible, a member of the child’s extended family or tribe. Non-native families and states are challenging the constitutionality of ICWA, arguing it discriminates on the basis of race. But the case could have implications that extend far beyond that - potentially upending Native sovereignty altogether. “A lot of laws flow from this special nation-to-nation relationship between tribes and the US federal government,” says Cherokee Nation journalist Rebecca Nagle. “And the fear is that because the plaintiffs are making such broad and sweeping arguments in Brackeen, (if the court strikes down ICWA) they could turn all of that – literally centuries of laws – on their head.”