In the Matter of Sapphire W.: NACC joined an amicus brief regarding the rights of non-respondent (“non-offending”) parents in child welfare cases.

In re A.H.: NACC filed an amicus brief arguing that the termination of the parent’s rights to their two youngest children was not strictly necessary to promote their best interest as they could have been placed in a guardianship with their older siblings at their grandparents’ home.

Closing the Justice Gap for Youth in the Foster Care to Prison Pipeline

Integrating Evaluations in Practice: Lessons Learned from Representing Survivors of CSEC within a Treatment Court Model—Materials

This content is only available to members.

A.R. v. D.R.: NACC filed an amicus brief supporting the application of the fundamental fairness standard for assessing prejudice in claims of ineffective assistance of counsel in Colorado dependency proceedings.

In re S.B.: NACC filed an amicus brief contending that S.B., a non-verbal older youth, was denied his due process and statutory rights when his counsel was prohibited from using the substituted judgment model to advocate for the Nevada court’s continued jurisdiction over S.B. after his eighteenth birthday. 

In re L.I. and H.D.K.: NACC and other legal services organizations filed an amicus brief arguing that parents’ counsel should be appointed upon the filing of a petition for custody or family supervision.

State of Alaska, Department of Health and Social Services, et al. vs. Z.C., through his next friend, Lorenz Kaufman:  NACC joined two amicus briefs arguing that due process requires the child welfare agency to provide foster youth with notice of the award of Social Security benefits, appointment as representative payee, and use of these benefits to cover foster care costs. (2/2)

State of Alaska, Department of Health and Social Services, et al. vs. Z.C., through his next friend, Lorenz Kaufman:  NACC joined two amicus briefs arguing that due process requires the child welfare agency to provide foster youth with notice of the award of Social Security benefits, appointment as representative payee, and use of these benefits to cover foster care costs. (1/2)

Rockett v. Eighmy: NACC filed an amicus brief arguing that a family court judge, who detained siblings and threatened to place them in foster care because they did not want to live with their mother, is not entitled to judicial immunity.