The MN Supreme Court oral arguments in the L.K. matter have been scheduled. (They were originally scheduled for February 4, 2025, but canceled due to a medical emergency involving one of the arguers.) This is a second round of arguments regarding the same case previously heard by our state Supreme Court last fall, September 30, 2024. The Supreme Court did not issue an opinion following the September 2024 oral arguments (referred to as L.K.I.). It will issue a combined opinion following this second set of oral arguments (in L.K.II), now scheduled for Tuesday, April 1, 2025, at 9:00 a.m..

Tuesday, April 1, 2025 – State Capitol, Supreme Court Courtroom (Second Floor) 

There are two cases on for oral argument that day. Our case will be heard first. Oral argument begins at 9:00 a.m. and typically lasts one hour. Appellants are limited to 35 minutes and Respondents are limited to 25 minutes. Oral arguments will be held in the Supreme Court Courtroom on the second floor of the Minnesota State Capitol and are open to the public, although seating is limited. 

The issues before the Supreme Court are as follows:

Issue 1: Do ICWA/MIFPA unconstitutionally deny equal protection to children they classify as “Indian” and to non-“Indian” persons seeking custody of them?

Issue 2: Does the district court violate a person’s constitutional right to petition the government and access the courts by prohibiting the person from intervening into a proceeding based on the person’s good-faith legal challenge to a governing law?

Issue 3: Did the district court err by denying petitioners’ motion for permissive intervention under Juvenile Protection Rule 34.02 based on petitioners challenging ICWA/MIFPA’s constitutionality, disagreement with a tribe on the twins’ best interests, seeking custody of the twins, bringing the twins to visit their biological mother and seeking her support, and having limited ability to see the twins after their removal?

Issue 4: May the district court dismiss an interested third party’s valid custody petition under Minn. Stat. § 267C.03 without an evidentiary hearing, by denying the party’s petition for permissive intervention under Juvenile Protection Rule 34.02?

Issue 5: Did the district court err by dismissing petitioners’ custody petition under Minn. Stat. § 267C.03 by, without an evidentiary hearing, notwithstanding Lewis-Miller v. Ross, 710 N.W.2d 565 (Minn. 2006), weighing the petition’s and affidavit’s allegations against evidence apparently from other sources?

It is our intention to have a virtual educational event via Zoom the morning of April 1, 2025, at the same time as the oral argument and simultaneously rebroadcast the livestream followed by a panel of experts to answer your questions. More details on that will come. PLEASE NOTE that no portion of the oral argument may be recorded. This is a rule of the Minnesota Supreme Court and a condition on our ability to rebroadcast. 

If you wish to access the oral arguments directly, the livestream link is published on the Supreme Court website at 8:30 a.m., only 30 minutes before oral argument begins.

To access the link directly, go to the MN Supreme Court website at 8:30 a.m. on April 1, 2025 for the livestream link: https://www.mncourts.gov/SupremeCourt