California COA Decides Greenville Rancheria v. Martin [tribal leadership dispute]

Here:

Briefs here.

Angelique EagleWoman on the Decolonization of Citation Practices in Scholarship

Angelique EagleWoman has posted “The Capitalization of ‘Tribal Nations’ and the Decolonization of Citation, Nomenclature, and Terminology in the United States,” recently published in the Mitchell Hamline Law Review, on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

Within the U.S. legal profession and field of law, words have consequences that are often detrimental to Native peoples in Native homelands. First, this Article will review the basics on the political status and proper understanding of Tribal Nations in the United States. This background will provide context for the analysis and examination of the colonizer language to follow. Next, this Article will examine the issues and consequences of the English language conventions of capitalization or terms referring to Tribal Nations in the United States. Specific issues with the legal style guides known as The AP Stylebook and The Chicago Manual of Style, and The Bluebook legal citation guide will be discussed for the perpetuation of language, citation, and nomenclature that casts Tribal Nations and peoples in an inferior status. Third, the Article will discuss the rationale for eliminating certain terms and phrases derogatory to Native peoples in the English language. Finally, the decolonization of legal terms, phrases, and citations will be connected to the larger issues of Tribal sovereignty, the Tribal Nations-U.S. relationship, and the self-determination of future generations of Native peoples of the Western Hemisphere.

Tribal Nations are nationalities and therefore, should be capitalized. Likewise, when the word “Tribes” relates to the Tribes in the United States, then the word is referring to nationalities and should be capitalized. Sister Tribal Nations in what is now known as Canada are referred to as the capitalized term, First Nations. There is no principled reason for the written standards in the United States to capitalize First Nations and not capitalize Tribal Nations and Tribes. The lack of capitalization in the United States for Tribal Nations, which have engaged in political diplomacy with the federal government, is a remnant of the colonizing disinformation from a bygone era.

Twin Efforts to Force Interior to Acknowledge Exclusive Tribal Jurisdiction over All Custody Cases is Dismissed by D.C. Federal Court

Here are the materials in Hess v. Dept. of the Interior (D.D.C.):

1 Complaint

7 DOI Motion to Dismiss

9-1 Cherokee Nation Motion to Dismiss

16 Response to 9

17 Response to 7

19 Reply in Support of 7

22 Reply in Support of 9

28 DCT Order

Here are the materials in Sissaudia (D.D.C.):

1 Complaint

7-1 Cherokee Nation Motion to Dismiss

8 Federal Motion to Dismiss

15 Response to 7

16 Response to 8

17 Reply in Support of 8

20 Reply in Support of 7

26 DCT Order

Bird v. Three Affiliated Cert Petition [sovereign immunity]

Here is the petition in Bird v. Tribal Business Council of the Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation:

Question presented:

Does inclusion of a mandatory arbitration clause in an Agreement with an Indian Tribe waive the Tribe’s sovereign immunity?

Eighth Circuit materials:

District court materials here.

Fletcher Draft Paper: “Federal Indian Law as Method”

Please check out “Federal Indian Law as Method,” likely forthcoming in the University of Colorado Law Review. Here is the abstract:

This Essay is written in the shadow of a series of noxious attacks on core principles of federal Indian law, most notoriously Haaland v. Brackeen, a challenge to the constitutionality of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA). The Supreme Court did not reach the merits of the equal protection challenges, but during oral argument, several judges expressed skepticism that Congressional Indian affairs enactments that grant privileges or preferences to Indian people could survive scrutiny under an equal protection analysis. Justice Kavanaugh, one of the judges most interested in the equal protection claims, wrote separately to highlight these issues, asserting that “the equal protection issue is serious.”
The parties siding with ICWA’s constitutionality argued to the Court that the Mancari case is a guide, whereas the opponents to ICWA’s constitutionality wanted to Court to ignore the case altogether. This Essay is a full-throated defense of the Mancari as a method of constitutional interpretation. Not only is the Mancari method correct, it is also the only justifiable method. This Essay proceeds with a short background on federal Indian law and its default interpretative rules. Next, the Essay surveys the application of and challenges to the Mancari method. Finally, the Essay concludes with a comparison of the methods proposed to replace or displace the Mancari method.
This Essay was prepared for the 31st Annual Rothgerber Symposium at Colorado Law School.

California COA Affirms Massive Judgment favoring Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe against its Former Counsel

Here is the opinion in Santa Monica Development Co. v. Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe:

Oklahoma Federal Court Dismisses ICRA Habeas Petition from Cherokee Criminal Defendant Living in Poland

It’s an older case, from back in April, but here are the materials in Gilliland v. Barteaux (N.D. Okla.):

Connecticut Public Radio Show on Brackeen and Ned Blackhawk’s New Book

Here.

Native America Calling on the Affirmative Action and Student Loans Cases

Here.

Seventh Circuit Holds Great Lakes Intertribal Council Possess Sovereign Immunity from Title VII Suit

Here are the materials: