What constitutes reversible error when a child welfare agency fails to make the statutorily required inquiry concerning a child’s potential Indian ancestry?

Held: Where an Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) inquiry is inadequate, conditional reversal is required. Minors were removed due to parents’ substance abuse and domestic violence issues. The Agency did not inquire with relatives about Indian heritage, despite being in contact with them throughout the case. The juvenile court found that ICWA did not apply and terminated parental rights. Mother appealed. The Second District Court of Appeal found that the ICWA inquiry was inadequate but the error was harmless because the record did not contain information suggesting a reason to believe that the minors may be Indian children within the meaning of ICWA. The California Supreme Court granted review and reversed. The duty of inquiry belongs to the Agency and may not be shifted to the parent. When there is an inadequate inquiry and the record is underdeveloped, it is impossible for reviewing courts to assess prejudice because it is unknown what information would be revealed from an adequate inquiry. Thus, a conditional reversal with directions for the Agency to comply with the inquiry requirement of section 224.2 is the appropriate remedy. This remedy best balances the interests of Indian children and tribes with the interests of dependent children in permanency and stability.

Justice Kruger wrote a concurring opinion commenting on what constitutes an adequate initial inquiry, and Justice Groban dissented.