Author: Kate Fort

Two Nominees to the D.C. Circuit Court

Kate Fort

From SCOTUSblog, principal deputy U.S. Solicitor General Sri Srinivasan and Caitlin Halligan were both nominated by President Obama to fill vacancies in the D.C. Circuit. Halligan was nominated previously, which we covered here. The DC Circuit is generally considered a path to a Supreme Court nomination, as well as handles a fair amount of Indian law cases.

Srinivasan has argued before the Supreme Court more than 20 times. In his job with the SG he represented the federal government in Cherokee Nation v. Leavitt (contract supports case).

As a private attorney with O’Melveny & Myers, he represented the Hawai’ia Congressional Delegation as an amicus in Hawaii v. Office of Hawaiian Affairs. There the Supreme Court overturned the Hawaii Supreme Court’s decision that the state couldn’t sell ceded lands before settling Native Hawaiian claims, based on the Apology Resolution passed by Congress. His brief argued for upholding the Hawaii Supreme Court:

Contrary to the contentions of petitioners and the United States, the Apology Resolution is more than “simply an apology” (Pet. Br. 30) “whose sole effect is a moral one” (U.S. Br. 30). Rather, the Resolution by its terms constitutes an official, definitive recognition and acknowledgment by Congress of the United States’ culpability for the illegal overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawai’i and of the Native Hawaiians’ unrelinquished claims to their ancestral lands. That acknowledgment differs from other statutes and resolutions that have expressed Congress’ regret for acts that had already been recognized as wrong or unlawful. See U.S. Br. 29-30 (describing resolution apologizing for “slavery and Jim Crow”). The Apology Resolution instead ended a long-running debate over the United States’ actions in Hawai’i over a century ago.3 The Supreme Court of Hawai’i properly relied on those considered findings, and Congress’ express support of the ongoing reconciliation with the Native Hawaiian people, to inform its ruling below.

Agamenv LLC v. Lavedure

Kate Fort

North Dakota federal district court refrains from issuing a TRO in a dispute between Turtle Mountain Tribal Council, Tribal Court, and gaming company.

Order

Complaint-FDC

Brief

Complaint-tribal court

Ex Parte TRO – tribal court

Motion to Withdraw TRO-tribal court

 

Onondaga Reply Brief in Onondaga Nation v. New York

Kate Fort1 Comment

Here.

Previous coverage here.

Brief in Gordon v. Holder (PACT Act Injunction Case)

Kate Fort

The Government’s brief arguing against Judge Lamberth’s injunction is here.

Previous coverage is here.

Restitution Denied in Kickapoo Casino Theft Case

Kate Fort

Here is the order.

Our previous coverage of U.S. v. Garza here.

Audio and Transcript from Yesterday’s Talk of the Nation

Kate Fort

Talk of the Nation had David Treuer and Mary Annette Pember on to discuss Native identity and ancestry yesterday.

Here is the audio: .20120607_totn_03
The transcript is here.

New Book on Tribal-State Relations in the Deep South

Kate Fort

Here.

The Other Movement: Indian Rights and Civil Rights in the Deep South [by Denise E. Bates] examines the most visible outcome of the Southern Indian Rights Movement: state Indian affairs commissions. In recalling political activism in the post-World War II South, rarely does one consider the political activities of American Indians as they responded to desegregation, the passing of the Civil Rights Acts, and the restructuring of the American political party system. Native leaders and activists across the South created a social and political movement all their own, which drew public attention to the problems of discrimination, poverty, unemployment, low educational attainment, and poor living conditions in tribal communities.
While tribal-state relationships have historically been characterized as tense, most southern tribes—particularly non-federally recognized ones—found that Indian affairs commissions offered them a unique position in which to negotiate power. Although individual tribal leaders experienced isolated victories and generated some support through the 1950s and 1960s, the creation of the intertribal state commissions in the 1970s and 1980s elevated the movement to a more prominent political level. Through the formalization of tribal-state relationships, Indian communities forged strong networks with local, state, and national agencies while advocating for cultural preservation and revitalization, economic development, and the implementation of community services.

 

Informational Meeting on Casino Ballot Initiative to be Held at Firekeepers Casino

Kate Fort

From MLive:

BATTLE CREEK, MI – The owners of FireKeepers Casino plan to hold an informational meeting for area community leaders about a statewide ballot proposal that would amend the state constitution to allow eight new privately owned casinos to be built in Michigan.

In a press release, the Nottawaseppi Huron Band of the Pottawatomi [sic] said the meeting is scheduled for 10 a.m. Thursday in the Bingo Room of FireKeepers Casino.

DOJ Press Release on Cross-Designating Tribal Prosecutors

Kate Fort

Department of Justice

Office of Public Affairs
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Tuesday, June 5, 2012
Office on Violence Against Women Announces Agreements to Cross-Designate Tribal Prosecutors in Nebraska, New Mexico, Montana, North Dakota and South Dakota

WASHINGTON – The Justice Department’s Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) announced today that four tribes in Nebraska, New Mexico, Montana, North Dakota and South Dakota will be awarded cooperative agreements to cross-designate tribal prosecutors to pursue violence against women cases in both tribal and federal courts.

The goal of the Tribal Special U.S. Attorney (SAUSA) program is to train eligible tribal prosecutors in federal law, procedure and investigative techniques to increase the likelihood that every viable criminal offense is prosecuted in tribal court, federal court or both.  The program  enables tribal prosecutors to bring violence against women cases in federal court and to serve as co-counsel with federal prosecutors on felony investigations and prosecutions of offenses arising out of their respective tribal communities.

“We know that violence against Native women has reached epidemic proportions,” said OVW Director Bea Hanson.  “Restoring safety for Native women requires the type of sustained cooperation between the federal and tribal justice systems that we see in the jurisdictions participating in our Tribal SAUSA project.”

Through this special initiative, OVW will support salary, travel and training costs of four tribal SAUSAs, who will work in collaboration with the U.S. Attorneys Offices in the Districts of Nebraska, New Mexico, Montana, North Dakota and South Dakota.  Specifically, OVW will award cooperative agreements to four federally recognized tribes to select qualified applicants in cooperation with the U.S. Attorney Offices to serve as cross-designated prosecutors.  These prosecutors will maintain an active violence against women crimes caseload, in tribal and/or federal court, while also helping to promote higher quality investigations, improved training and better inter-governmental communication.

Tailored to meet the particular needs of the participating jurisdiction, these pilot programs are designed to improve the quality of cases, the coordination of resources and the communication of priorities both within and between the various law enforcement agencies working in this area.

The Tribal SAUSA Pilot Project was largely driven by input gathered from the Justice Department’s 2009 Tribal Nation Listening Session on Public Safety and Law Enforcement, and its annual tribal consultation on violence against women.  The Tribal SAUSA initiative is another step in the Justice Department’s on-going efforts to increase engagement, coordination and action on public safety in tribal communities, and represents a partnership between OVW, the Executive Office of US Attorney’s and the US Attorney’s Offices in Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota and South Dakota.

The recipients of these awards are:

  • Pueblo of Laguna in New Mexico
  • Fort Belknap Tribe in Montana
  • Winnebago Tribe in Nebraska
  • Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, in North Dakota and South Dakota
12-715
Office on Violence Against Women

State Offers Settlement to Onondaga Nation Protestors Injured by Police . . . 15 Years Ago

Kate Fort

Here.

New York state has agreed to pay $3 million to 98 people, mostly Native Americans, who were beaten, arrested or chased away by state troopers from a protest on Onondaga Nation territory 15 years ago.

Lawyers for the state and the people who sued over the May 18, 1997, conflict agreed to settle the case for $2.995 million, according to Terrance Hoffmann, a lawyer for half of the plaintiffs.

The settlement won’t be final until all the plaintiffs sign it, Hoffmann said. More than half have signed since the lawyers met with some of the plaintiffs May 17 at Bellevue Country Club in Syracuse, he said. Lawyers are tracking down the rest, he said. Five of the plaintiffs have died, and their survivors have agreed to the settlement, Hoffmann said.