Kirsten Carlson on Rethinking Legislative Advocacy

Kirsten Matoy Carlson has posted “Rethinking Legislative Advocacy” on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

In an age of statutes, legislative advocates influence the substantive content of almost every law. Yet scholars know very little about the role that advocates play in shaping statutory law because the study of legislative advocacy has been left to political scientists, who focus on the political rather than the legal aspects of legislative lawmaking. This Article responds to this gap in the literature by presenting an innovative, mixed methods approach to studying legislative advocacy that brings law back into the study of legislative advocacy and provides more accurate descriptions of how legislative advocates behave. This legal approach to legislative advocacy improves on the existing political science literature by emphasizing the legislative process as a lawmaking enterprise and highlighting the importance of the substantive content of statutory laws to legislative advocates and their behavior. The Article demonstrates the utility of this approach by presenting new empirical data on American Indian advocacy. My analysis produces two important insights about legislative advocates’ behavior overlooked in previous studies. First, it reveals that advocates perceive legislative advocacy to be about modifying the substantive content of a proposed law. Legislative advocates take the law seriously as they engage in nuanced and sophisticated strategies to interact with legislators and other political actors to craft statutory laws. They advocate on a wide range of proposed laws, shift their positions strategically throughout the legislative process, and frequently seek to modify proposed laws. Second, my account of Indian advocacy emphasizes that legislative advocacy involves legal as well as political work. Indian advocates regularly used legal frames and arguments to educate and persuade legislators to shape the law in ways that better responded to their needs.

Federal Court Allows RICO Action against Crow Health Care Center to Proceed (for now)

Here are the materials in Wilhite v. Littlelight (D. Mont.):

Post in related case here.

Burt Lake Band Prevails in Federal Recognition Procedural Dispute with Interior, Case Remanded

Here is the order in Burt Lake Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians v. Bernhardt (D.D.C.):

Briefs here.

Federal Court Holds Interior May Not Take Land into Trust for Gaming Purposes for Keetoowah

Here is the opinion in Cherokee Nation v. Bernhardt (N.D. Okla.):

Prior post here.

Former Indian Law Professor Falsely Claims China is Liable for COVID-19

More in the sorry tale of Gavin Clarkson (it is my understanding he is a licensed attorney, but after this and other missteps clients should probably beware):

In my earlier post I relied on a search in the New Mexico State Bar directory, but Gavin is licensed in Texas.

Cert Petition in Diné Citizens against Ruining Our Environment v. Navajo Transitional Energy Co. LLC

Here:

Question presented:

Whether Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19 requires dismissal of an Administrative Procedure Act action challenging a federal agency’s compliance with statutory requirements governing federal agency decisions, for failure to join a non-federal entity that would benefit from the challenged agency action and cannot be joined without consent.

Lower court materials here.

Tribes Prevail in Standing Rock Suit, Court Orders Army Corps Prepare EIS on Dakota Access Pipeline

Here is the order in Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. United States Army Corps of Engineers (D.D.C.):

2020-03-25-dkt-496-memorandum-opinion-re-495-order-on-motions-for-summary-judgment.-signed-by-judge-james-e.-boasberg-on-3252020.pdf

More details later.