We’ve been following Sault Ste. Marie Tribe v. Bouschor for many years, and now the claim against Bernard Bouschor may go before a jury next week. But in a very interesting pre-trial order, Judge Johnson (from Emmet County, since the local judge recused himself) ordered that no Sault Tribe members may sit on the jury due to their “financial interest in the litigation.” Order here: Judge Johnson Order Excluding SSM Members from Jury.
Anyone aware of this happening elsewhere in Indian country? I’d imagine it wouldn’t happen often, since there aren’t many of these kinds of claims against former tribal officials in state courts. What I want to know is why the tribe brought suit in state court, when it had a perfectly good tribal court at its disposal. [Now I’m told it was contractual. Now I understand.]
Here is the amended complaint: Amd-Complaint-Fifth[1].
Turtle Talk 
The Sault Tribe does not have a perfectly good tribal court system. It is made up of Bouschor friends and family members. It was the Sault Tribe court who overturned a secretarial election in which Sault Tribe members voted, overwhelmingly, not to allow Bernard Bouschor to run for a seat on the board again. After all, we are suing him. He ran and won which was a real mystery since 74% of the voters said ‘no more Bernard Bouschor.” The word of the members means nothing when it comes to Bouschor and his court.
The sault tribe’s justice system is populated by board appointment. None have jd’s some are college grads, but most do not. There is talk of filing criminal charges after civil hearing. The employment contracts wavied immunity so they have the trust of state courts. This was a demand by the same laywers who worked for Bernard Bouschor and were paid off.