plan (including, if appropriate, through an interstate placement), and to complete whatever steps are .necessary to finalize the pennanent placement of the child.”), 16 . Under KRS 22A.020, the Court of Appeals has jurisdiction over appeals from the family court even when the family court decision addresses a matter otherwise within the jurisdiction of the district court. 17 . The phras ion of Local Government, 72 North Carolina Law Review 1197, 1215 n. 107 (1994) (noting that mens rea and self-prosecution problems can call ‘ into question the criminal liability of states and state agencies as well as local governments); Cobell v. Norton, 334 F.3d. 1128 (D.C.Cir.2003) (discussing criminal contempt alleged against federal agency). 19 . Cf. Barry v. Bowen, 884 F.2d 442 (9th Cir.1989) (<HOLDING>); In re Newlin, 29 B.R. 781, 785
holding that sovereign immunity was implicated and violated by the bankruptcy courts criminal contempt citation against a government agency the irs holding that compensatory contempt fines awarded against the secretary of health and human services were barred by sovereign immunity holding that sovereign immunity barred claim for compensatory sanctions against the government holding that sovereign immunity barred a wrongful death claim against the board and stating that the only question is whether the boards sovereign immunity protection was waived emphasis added holding that a district courts remand order effectively invalidating certain regulations of the secretary of health and human services was an immediately appealable order