Here is the petition from BMIC, Little T, and Sault Tribe.
Three Michigan Tribes Petition State Agency to End Enbridge Line 5 Tunnel Permits
California Federal Court Dismisses Yurok Ancestral Remains Case After Cher-Ae Heights Rancheria Intervenes
Three Fires Confederacy Reclaims the Straits as a Place of Anishinaabe Ceremony and Collective Action
Great Lakes region walked the Mackinac
Bridge on Labor Day.
(Photo/Dustin Meshigaud)
For the first time, the Three Fires Confederacy joined the annual Mackinac Bridge Walk on Labor Day, recasting it as an assertion of Anishinaabe presence and responsibility at the Straits. About 1,000 Native participants gathered at sunrise for water ceremonies on both shores, then walked behind water protectors and eagle staffs to meet over the water. Organizers emphasized that the gathering wasn’t merely a demonstration against Line 5, but a ceremony affirming that the Straits remain Anishinaabe homelands.
Odawa, Ojibwe, and Potawatomi people appeared collectively as the Three Fires Confederacy, a living regional institution carrying responsibilities to the waters, future generations, and more-than-human relatives. The Confederacy called for Line 5’s decommissioning based on treaty rights, the rights of nature, and protection of the public good.
Additional Resources
Native News Online’s report includes photographs and statements from organizers.
Treasury Recognizes Tribal Child Welfare Authority in New Children’s Accounts
ICWA litigation and scholarship understandably focus heavily on getting jurisdiction into Tribal hands, emphasizing notice, intervention, transfer, exclusive jurisdiction, placement, termination, and adoption. But jurisdiction is just the beginning. Once the Tribe is the responsible government, does the rest of the administrative state actually recognize that authority? Who receives federal benefits on the child’s behalf? Who manages the child’s assets? Who can consent to services? And when a Tribal guardianship order reaches a federal or state administrative system, does that system recognize it? Ultimately, getting jurisdiction is necessary but not sufficient.
Treasury’s implementation of the new “Trump Accounts” provides a small but useful data point. A child welfare agency of a state, territorial, or Tribal government that is the legal guardian of an eligible child may elect to open the child’s account. The IRS further says its Office of Governmental Liaison will work directly with the relevant Tribal agency and coordinate with the IRS Office of Indian Tribal Governments in assisting Tribal child welfare agencies. For Native children in Tribal foster care, the interesting question is therefore not simply who fills out a federal form, but whether the administrative machinery downstream of a Tribal jurisdictional determination actually treats the Tribe as the government exercising legal authority over the child.
Treasury itself recognizes the issue. Its Dear Tribal Leader Letter says Tribes may have “distinct laws and guardianship structures” that should inform implementation, and it asks Tribal leaders and Tribal child welfare representatives for feedback on how the department can assist Tribes with understanding the filing requirements to open up this initiative to Tribal foster youth. Feedback is specifically requested for the below questions:
- What questions or comments do you have regarding the Fostering the Future Accounts, for eligible youth in Tribal foster care systems?
- What questions do Tribal child welfare agencies have regarding submitting account elections?
- What communication would help Tribal child welfare agencies understand this filing process? Discuss with OTP and Fiscal Service.
- What questions do Tribal child welfare agencies have regarding situations where a child’s placement, guardianship status, jurisdiction, or responsible child welfare agency changes after a Trump Account has been opened and a child remains eligible for the pilot contribution?
Treasury will hold a Tribal listening session on September 18 at 1:00 p.m. EDT, with written comments due October 23 at 11:59 p.m. Alaska time. The session offers a concrete opportunity to identify whether this particular system recognizes Tribal guardianship cleanly in practice, and where the problems may arise.
Additional resources
- U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Tribal and Native Affairs, Dear Tribal Leader Letter: Fostering the Future Initiative Listening Session (Aug. 7, 2026)
- U.S. Department of the Treasury, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and First Lady Melania Trump Announce Access to Trump Accounts for Foster Youth, under Mrs. Trump’s Fostering the Future Initiative (June 11, 2026)
- Internal Revenue Service, Update to Form 4547 for State, Territorial and Tribal Child Welfare Agencies
- Administration for Children and Families, Fostering the Future Powered by Trump Accounts — FAQ
- U.S. Department of the Treasury, Tribal Consultations
International Human Rights Update: Indigenous Peoples Can Help Set the UN Climate Platform’s Next Priorities
The UN climate process is seeking input on what its Local Communities and Indigenous Peoples Platform should do next.
Indigenous Peoples, Tribal governments, local communities, and other stakeholders may submit proposed activities and thematic priorities for the LCIPP’s 2028–2031 workplan by September 30. Comments will be considered by the Facilitative Working Group at its 16th meeting (FWG 16) in November 2026 in Antalya, Turkey.
Some questions commenters might address include:
- Looking towards 2031, what concrete outcomes should the LCIPP seek to achieve?
- Drawing on the discussions across the gathering, what issues, activities, or areas of work should be prioritized in the 2028-2031 workplan to help achieve those outcomes?
- Where could stronger connections between the LCIPP and other bodies, workstreams, and processes under the UNFCCC create the greatest added value?
Organizations with UNFCCC observer status submit through their designated contacts; those without observer status may send comments directly to submission-info@unfccc.int.
A separate November 1 deadline invites views on the LCIPP’s impact to date. The official two-page submission guide is here.
The current workplan of the LCIPP can be accessed here: https://lcipp.unfccc.int/sites/default/files/2024-12/Baku_Workplan_of_the_Local_Communities_and_Indigenous_Peoples_Platform.pdf
Cert Petition Materials in Perez v. City of San Antonio [Lipan Native American Church]
EPA’s New WOTUS Proposal Deepens the Regulatory Gap for Tribal Waters
EPA and the Army Corps have supplemented their proposed WOTUS rule with alternatives that could sharply reduce federal protection for Tribal waters in a prepublication document shared at the link above.
The agencies are now considering limiting “relatively permanent” waters to those flowing virtually year-round and requiring wetlands to contain perennial surface water continuously connected to another jurisdictional water, a standard they acknowledge would exclude most intermittent streams and a majority of currently jurisdictional adjacent wetlands, with especially significant effects in the arid West.
The proposal would result in significant implications for Tribes, since most eligible Tribes lack TAS authority to administer Clean Water Act programs, many lack resources to build equivalent Tribal programs, and pollution may originate in adjacent jurisdictions. In other words, the federalism premise that another sovereign can simply regulate waters abandoned by the federal government often fails in Indian country. The Tribal regulatory gap would effectively be made more consequential under this proposed substantially narrower federal rule. Tribes may request government-to-government consultation at CWAwotus@epa.gov once the supplemental notice is published in the Federal Register, opening the 30-day comment period.
From the supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking:
The agencies acknowledge that because they generally implement Clean Water Act programs on Tribal lands, a reduced scope of Federal jurisdiction as a result of the Sackett decision will affect Tribes differently than it will affect States. Currently, of the Tribes that are eligible, most have not received treatment in a manner similar to a State (TAS) status to administer Clean Water Act regulatory programs. While some Tribes have established Tribal water programs under Tribal law or have the authority to establish Tribal programs under Tribal law, many Tribes are still building capacity and may lack resources to create a Tribal water program under Tribal law, to administer a program, or to expand programs that currently exist.
Therefore, Tribes may disproportionately rely on the Federal Government for water program implementation and enforcement of water quality violations. Tribes may also be affected by pollution from adjacent jurisdictions. Many Tribes are located in the arid West, where there are fewer waters that may meet the relatively permanent standard. Nonetheless, the proposed rule, as supplemented by this notice, preserves Tribal authority to choose whether to include waters that are not covered under the Clean Water Act under Tribal laws and regulations. Any decision by the Tribes to protect beyond the limits of the Clean Water Act is not compelled by the statute or by this proposed rule, as supplemented.
Worth a Read: After more than a century, Fort Peck children are coming home from Carlisle
The Fort Peck Journal has provided community-centered coverage of the return of three Fort Peck children who were sent to the Carlisle Indian Industrial School together in 1890 and died there.
Louis H. Montclair’s coverage documents how the Fort Peck community has prepared to bring the children home through family participation, an awareness walk across the reservation, the Orange Flag Project, community prayers, and ceremony.
Peter Howe and Richard Morgan Disinterred at Carlisle; Christine Redstone Next by Louis H. Montclair for Fort Peck Journal, Sept. 1, 2026
After More Than a Century, Fort Peck Children Are Coming Home From Carlisle by Louis H. Montclair for Fort Peck Journal, September 1, 2026
From a Phone Screen to Carlisle: How the Orange Flag Project Took on a Life of Its Own by Louis H. Montclair for Fort Peck Journal, September 1, 2026
D.C. Federal Court Rules in Favor of Coquille Trust Land Acquisition
Here are the new materials in Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Indians v. Dept. of the Interior (D.D.C.):
Prior post here.
CFC Dismisses Takings Claim of Confiscated Hemp Products from Standing Rock Rez
Here are the materials in Luger v. United States (Fed. Cl.):
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.