Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians v. Holyfield

Supreme Court of the United States · 1989 · Family Law

490 U.S. 30 (1989)

Updated August 1, 2026

Family LawICWAjurisdictionIndian Child Welfare Acttribal jurisdictionexclusive jurisdictiondomicilereservation domicile

Facts

Twin babies were born out of wedlock in Gulfport, Mississippi, to parents who were both enrolled members of the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians and were residents and domiciliaries of the Choctaw Reservation. Twelve days after birth, the mother executed a consent-to-adoption form before the Harrison County Chancery Court, and the father signed a similar consent; the Holyfields then filed an adoption petition in that court, which quickly entered a final decree of adoption. The Tribe later moved to vacate the decree, arguing that under the ICWA exclusive jurisdiction belonged to the tribal court because the twins were domiciled on the reservation. The state courts rejected that argument, relying on the facts that the twins were born off the reservation, had never been physically present on it, and had been voluntarily surrendered by their parents.

Issue

Whether, for purposes of the Indian Child Welfare Act, twins born off the reservation to unmarried parents who were both domiciled on the reservation were themselves domiciled on the reservation, so that the tribal court had exclusive jurisdiction over the adoption proceeding under 25 U.S.C. § 1911(a).

Rule

Under the ICWA, the meaning of 'domicile' is a matter of uniform federal law, not state law. In the absence of a statutory definition, Congress used domicile in its generally accepted sense: a minor's domicile follows that of the parents, and an illegitimate child's domicile traditionally follows that of the mother; physical presence on the reservation is not required, and parents may not defeat § 1911(a) exclusive tribal jurisdiction by arranging an off-reservation birth or voluntary surrender for adoption.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

Leah Toma, an enrolled member of the Red Mesa Tribe, is domiciled on the tribe's reservation in Arizona. She gives birth to a nonmarital child at a hospital in Phoenix, and three days later signs papers for an adoption filed by Daniel and Nora Pike in an Arizona state court; the baby has never been on the reservation.

Which court has exclusive jurisdiction over the adoption proceeding under the ICWA?

Explanation. Under the majority opinion, domicile under the ICWA is defined by uniform federal law. A minor generally takes the domicile of the parents, and an illegitimate child traditionally takes the domicile of the mother. Physical presence on the reservation is not required. Thus a nonmarital Indian child born off reservation to a reservation-domiciled mother is domiciled on the reservation at birth, giving the tribal court exclusive jurisdiction under § 1911(a).