Turtle Talk

MSU ILPC Conference — Treaty Waters at Risk: Tribal Sovereignty and the Line 5 Challenge in the Great Lakes — April 17, 2026

Join us at MSU Law for Treaty Waters at Risk: Tribal Sovereignty and the Line 5 Challenge in the Great Lakes, a one-day conference on Friday, April 17, 2026, examining the legal and environmental stakes of energy infrastructure in treaty-protected waters.

Featuring a keynote by Whitney Gravelle, MSU Law and ILPC alumna and President of the Bay Mills Indian Community, the program brings together leading voices to discuss treaty rights, co-management, and the ongoing Line 5 conflicts at Bad River and the Straits of Mackinac.

Living with Treaties Day 2, Morning Sessions

April 10, 2026Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Jay Cook, Jonathon Quint, Gabrielle Ione Hickman, Michael Witgen

Ned Blackhawk, Jon Parmenter, Mary Mount Pleasant

UM Inclusive History Project Symposium “Living with Treaties” Opening Events

April 10, 2026April 10, 2026Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Yesterday evening. . . .

Opening talk show guests: Fletcher, Michael Witgen, Greg Dowd, and Ned Blackhawk (Maggie Blackhawk arrived later)

Conference details here.

Montana Law’s American Indian Law Week: “Keeping Data Sacred” — April 13-17, 2026

April 9, 2026April 9, 2026Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Kate Fort on ICWA Enforcement

April 9, 2026Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Kathryn E. Fort has published “The Challenge of Indian Child Welfare Act Enforcement in the Modern Age of Child Dependency” in the Yale Law Journal Forum.

Here is the abstract:

Nearly fifty years after its passage, the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) remains a vital part of the child welfare system to protect Native children and families. Since then, both federal and state law have incorporated provisions of ICWA for the benefit of all families in that system. However, ICWA itself is regularly disregarded and misunderstood by practitioners and judicial officers. This Essay describes the application of ICWA in the current child welfare system, as well as identifies programs designed to improve implementation of the law, all from the perspective of an appellate practitioner with twenty years of ICWA experience. While there is no magic wand to wave that can fix the persistent barriers to ICWA enforcement and implementation, the continued work of those committed to changing the current system creates solutions that can benefit Native families and, if history is any guide, ultimately all families.

Wabanaki Nations Intervene to Defend Maine’s Internet Gaming Law

April 9, 2026Matthew Campbell

On April 1, 2026, the four Wabanaki Nations — the Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians, the Mi’kmaq Nation, the Passamaquoddy Tribe, and the Penobscot Nation — represented by the Native American Rights Fund and co-counsel filed an unopposed motion to intervene in Oxford Casino Hotel, et al. v. Champion in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine. On April 2, 2026, the district court granted the Nations’ motion. The Nations’ intervention ensures their voices are represented in a lawsuit challenging Maine’s new internet gaming law, An Act to Create Economic Opportunity for the Wabanaki Nations Through Internet Gaming, a statute that is important to unique Tribal economic and sovereign interests.

Previous post on this matter is here.

The law, enacted earlier this year, establishes a regulatory framework allowing the Wabanaki Nations to seek licenses to operate internet gaming in Maine. The statute is designed to support Tribal self-determination and create economic opportunities that strengthen the Wabanaki governments and their ability to provide for their communities. The Nations are the direct beneficiaries of the law and have significant sovereign, economic, and constitutional interests at stake in the litigation.

The lawsuit, brought by Oxford Casino Hotel and others, seeks to invalidate the law on constitutional grounds. By granting the Wabanaki Nations’ motion to intervene, the court has allowed the Nations to participate as party defendants to defend the law and protect their unique sovereign right as governments to pursue economic development in order to fund essential government programs, services and infrastructure.

Leaders of the Wabanaki Nations emphasized the importance of intervening to safeguard economic sovereignty and shared prosperity across Maine.

Chief Francis, Penobscot Nation: “Our intervention in Oxford v. Champion is about the future — for our people and for all of rural Maine. This law gives the Penobscot Nation a fair chance to build jobs, fund essential services, and partner across communities to heal long-standing economic disparities, while recognizing our unique politic status as a Tribal Nation. We look forward to the opportunity to defend this law and our right to economic self-determination.”

Chief Sabattis, Houlton Band of Maliseet: “This law is crucial to advancing the Houlton Band’s efforts to develop independent, long-term revenue sources that are not dependent on federal funding and will enable us to support and expand governmental services for Maliseet families and other community members. It is a result of collaboration between the Wabanaki Nations and state government under our unique jurisdictional relationship to create opportunities that will enable the Nations to share in the economic benefits of gaming.”

Chief McCormack, Mi’kmaq Nation: “Rural Maine and our Nations are interconnected. When Tribal economies grow, local businesses, workers, and towns grow too. The Mi’kmaq Nation is proud to stand in court with the other Wabanaki Nations to defend a law that makes that shared prosperity possible.”

Chief Bassett, Passamaquoddy Tribe (Pleasant Point): “The Wabanaki Nations face steeper barriers to prosperity than other Tribes around the country, and we have been historically blocked out of Maine’s casino gaming industry as our peers across Indian country rebuilt their economies and the economies around them using those same economic tools we were deprived of. Defending this law is defending our right to pursue self-determination. We are fighting for a brighter economic future for our future generations.”

Chief Nicholas, Passamaquoddy Tribe (Indian Township): “The Passamaquoddy Tribe has been steadfast in its support of economic sovereignty as its number one priority the past two years in the Maine legislature. We are ready to stand in court to defend a law we were proud to fight for over the past years in the state house. Maine’s new internet gaming law is intended to promote a better economic future for Wabanaki communities and for rural Maine. By protecting this law, we protect our future.”

Native American Rights Fund Staff Attorney Lenny Powell: “The Native American Rights Fund is proud to jointly represent the Wabanaki Nations in efforts to defend ‘An Act to Create Economic Opportunity for the Wabanaki Nations Through Internet Gaming.’ This attack represents an unfortunate effort to undermine Tribal-state partnerships. It seeks to undermine the legal basis for constructive government-to-government policy collaboration, despite decades of data showing that Tribal and non-Tribal communities alike are stronger when Tribal nations are empowered in their pursuit of self-determination.”

Protections continue for Baaj Nwaavjo I’tah Kukveni – Ancestral Footprints of the Grand Canyon National Monument

April 9, 2026Matthew Campbell

On April 1, 2026, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals threw out the Arizona Legislature’s challenge to Baaj Nwaavjo I’tah Kukveni-Ancestral Footprints of the Grand Canyon National Monument. The decision leaves the monument in place and fully protected. You can see the decision here:

2026-04-01 25-1370 Memorandum – 9th Cir USCA Download

In September of 2024, the District Court denied, without prejudice, the Tribes’ motion to intervene in this case, finding the United States adequately represented the Tribes’ interests at that time. Here is that order:

2024-9-9 DOC 72 Order denying Motions to Intervene Tribal Nations, and Conservation Intervenors, granting State intervenors 4887-3571-0947 v.1 Download

The Ninth Circuit’s April 1 decision affirms the District Court decision dismissing the two consolidated cases filed against the Monument designation.

The National Monument protects thousands of historic and scientific objects, sacred places, vital water sources, and the ancestral homelands of many Indigenous Peoples. Baaj Nwaavjo I’tah Kukveni lands include cultural and sacred places of the Havasupai Tribe, Hopi Tribe, Hualapai Tribe, Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians, Las Vegas Paiute Tribe, Moapa Band of Paiutes, Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah, Navajo Nation, San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe, Yavapai-Apache Nation, Pueblo of Zuni, and the Colorado River Indian Tribes. The Monument receives its name from the Indigenous names given to the area by the Havasupai and Hopi. Baaj nwaavjo (BAAHJ – NUH-WAAHV-JOH) means “where Indigenous peoples roam” in the Havasupai language, and i’tah kukveni (EE-TAH – KOOK-VENNY) means “our ancestral footprints” in the Hopi language.

Learn More: Arizona Legislature v. Biden