Angela Riley on Indigenous Cultural Property Law

Angela R. Riley has published “The Ascension of Indigenous Cultural Property Law” in the Michigan Law Review.

Prof. Riley presenting the paper last fall at ASU.

Here is the abstract:

Indigenous Peoples across the world are calling on nation-states to “decolonize” laws, structures, and institutions that negatively impact them. Though the claims are broad based, there is a growing global emphasis on issues pertaining to Indigenous Peoples’ cultural property and the harms of cultural appropriation, with calls for redress increasingly framed in the language of human rights. Over the last decade, Native people have actively fought to defend their cultural property. The Navajo Nation sued Urban Outfitters to stop the sale of “Navajo panties,” the Quileute Tribe sought to enjoin Nordstrom’s marketing of “Quileute Chokers,” and the descendants of Tasunke Witko battled to end production of “Crazy Horse Malt Liquor.” And today, Indigenous Peoples are fighting to preserve sacred ceremonies and religious practices at places like Standing Rock, Oak Flat, and Bear’s Ears. Though the claims range from “lands to brands,” these conflicts are connected by a common thread: they are all contemporary examples of Indigenous Peoples’ efforts to protect their cultural property. As issues surrounding cultural property play out on the global stage, there is a parallel movement underway within Indigenous communities themselves. More than fifteen years ago, in 2005, I conducted a comprehensive study of tribal law to understand what American Indian tribes were doing to protect their own cultural property within tribal legal systems. Since my original study, the ground around issues of cultural preservation and Indigenous rights—including the 2007 adoption of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, among others— have reignited interest in Indigenous Peoples’ own laws. Inspired by a convergence of global events impacting cultural rights, in 2020 and 2021, I set out to update my survey results and analyze the tribal cultural preservation systems and tribal laws of all 574 federally recognized American Indian tribes and Alaskan Native Villages in the United States. This Article reports those findings, situating the results in a human rights framework and leading to a core, central thesis: the data reveal a striking increase in the development of tribal cultural property laws, as Indian tribes seek to advance human and cultural rights in innovative and inspired ways. Indeed, in this Article, I contend we are witnessing a new jurisgenerative moment today in the cultural property arena, with tribal law already influencing decisionmakers at multiple ‘sites’—international, national, and subnational—in real time, with great potential for the future. To further demonstrate this phenomenon, I highlight the case study of the recent agreement to repatriate the Maaso Kova, a ceremonial deer head, from Sweden to the Yaqui peoples, and I also introduce several other examples where the seeds have been planted for the growth of the next jurisgenerative moment in Indigenous cultural property rights.

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!!!!

Parties Renew Motions for Summary Judgment in Sault Tribe Bid for Detroit-Area Casino

Here are the new materials in Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians v. Haaland (formerly Bernhardt, Zinke, etc.) (D.D.C.):

Time to rumble.

103 Federal Reply

104 Tribes Reply

This case is on remand from the D.C. Circuit.

New Mexico COA Holds Navajo Nation Member Who Rents is Exempt from State Income Tax

Here are the materials in Skeet v. New Mexico Taxation and Revenue Department:

Department Opening Brief

Answer Brief

Reply

Opinion

A wolf protesting taxes I guess.

UDub Indian Law Symposium — Friday, Dec. 9, 2022

Register here.

UW Law will host the 35th annual Indian Law Symposium on Friday, Dec. 9, 2022, featuring a full set of topics from panelists across the country. Programming includes updates on litigation and federal legislation, an ethics session about cultural considerations for competent tribal legal representation, and sessions on tribes, mining and opportunities for reform; the Indian Child Welfare Act; and the Supreme Court.

The program will be held in a virtual format on Zoom. It is co-sponsored by the Washington Law Review and Native American Law Center.

Wisconsin Federal Court Issues Post-Trial Opinion in Bad River Line 5 Suit

Here is today’s opinion in Bad River Band of Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians v. Enbridge Energy Co. Inc. (W.D. Wis.):

This one has illustrations.

Prior post here.

California Federal Court Dismisses Final Two Defendants in Acres Bonusing v. Ramsey (formerly Marston)

Here are the materials in Acres Bonusing Inc. v. Ramsey (N.D. Cal.):

90 First Amended Complaint

96 Motion to Dismiss

101 Opposition

102 Reply

105 DCT Order

Prior post here.

From DALL-E, an abstract painting of a judge slapping someone with a fish. Yeah, sure, it could be that.

Fletcher and Khalil on ICWA Preemption and Commandeering

Fletcher and Randall F. Khalil have published “Preemption, Commandeering, and the Indian Child Welfare Act” in the Wisconsin Law Review.

Blurb:

We argue that the anti-commandeering challenges against ICWA are unfounded because all provisions of ICWA provide a set of legal standards to be applied in states which validly and expressly preempt state law without unlawfully commandeering the states’ executive or legislative branches. Congress’s power to compel state courts to apply federal law is long established and beyond question.

Excerpt from Fletcher comic book about the Brackeen argument that no one may ever read.

Fifth Circuit Briefs in Spivey v. Chitimacha Tribe of Louisiana

Here:

Lower court materials here.

D.C. Federal Court Dismisses Suits Attacking United Keetoowah and Kialegee Compacts, Allows Suits Against Comanche and Otoe-Missouria to Proceed

Here are the materials in Cherokee Nation v. Dept, of the Interior (D.D.C.):

Prior post here.

Kablooey

Ninth Circuit Rejects Tribal Immunity under Bankruptcy Act

Here is the unpublished order in Numa Corp. v. Diven, formerly Cedarville Rancheria v. Diven.

Briefs here.

Another weird one from DALL-E: A showdown between Indians and lawyers before the Supreme Court.