Court: Michigan Court of Appeals (Unpublished)
Case Name: In re Aranjo

Holding, inter alia, that the trial court did not clearly err in finding that terminating respondent-Mora’s parental rights to his minor child (S) was in S’s best interests, the court affirmed the trial court’s order terminating his parental rights. Mora argued, inter alia, that the trial court was required to investigate whether S might qualify for Mexican citizenship because, if he did, it “might give rise to a duty to involve the Mexican government if there was a risk he would lose his parents.” However, he did not cite any legal authority indicating that S’s possible status as a Mexican citizen was legally relevant. While Mora observed that the trial court asked the mother whether the child had any Native American heritage, that inquiry was required because of the rights and protections afforded under the ICWA. Mora failed to cite any statute or other authority applying similar rights or protections to Mexican children, or to children that may have dual citizenship with another nation. Thus, he did not establish a plain error. The court affirmed the trial court’s order terminating respondents’ parental rights. Full Text Opinion