Emily Brand, a recent law grad, published “The Struggle to Exercise a Treaty Right: An Analysis of the Makah Tribe’s Path to Whale,” in Environs, a law journal from UC Davis. An excerpt from the intro:
At the heart of this conflict are the actors who are all trying to do what they think is right. The animal rights activists want to participate in the administrative system to ensure marine mammal protection, the Makah Tribe wants to exercise its treaty right to continue focal cultural and religious traditions, and NOAA wants to fulfill its administrative duty, including its fiduciary duty under the Neah Bay Treaty. Unfortunately, the combination of good intentions created a momentum that is no longer controllable by any one party and left the Makah with an indefinitely suspended treaty right.
The Tribe now faces a complex legal road, juggling the administrative action, the criminal case, and an imminent civil suit. The Tribe must act carefully in managing its actions and arguments so as not to foreclose any way to exercise its treaty right. The Makah have three main avenues of action: 1) follow the administrative agency MMPA waiver process defined by Anderson v. Evans; 2) re-assert issues from Anderson in criminal court; or 3) re-visit Anderson’s challenges after NOAA’s waiver determination in a civil suit. Each path involves a different strategy and risk. However, all paths lead to the Ninth Circuit and ultimately the Supreme Court, the only place where this issue could finally be put the rest.
One thought on “Legal Scholarship on the Makah Treaty Right to Whaling”
Comments are closed.