Here are the materials in United States v. Washington subproceeding 89-3-12 (W.D. Wash.):
143 DCT Order — Permanent Injunction
150 Klallam Tribes’ Petition for Review
Here are the materials in United States v. Washington subproceeding 89-3-12 (W.D. Wash.):
143 DCT Order — Permanent Injunction
150 Klallam Tribes’ Petition for Review
Here are the new materials in Pueblo of Jemez v. United States (D.N.M.):
409 Motion for Reconsideration
Prior post here.
Here are the materials in Seneca Nation v. Cuomo (W.D. N.Y.):
44 New York Supplemental Brief
Earlier briefs here.
Fletcher’s new working paper is up on SSRN: “Erasing the Thin Blue Line: An Indigenous Proposal.”
Here is the abstract:
The article was inspired by the statements of support for the Black Lives Matter movement from state supreme courts like those in Washington and California, and elsewhere. I am a tribal appellate judge for several tribes here in Michigan, and I serve on the Michigan Tribal-State-Judicial Forum. In part, this article is addressed to the state judges who have spoken out on BLM and the judges on the Michigan forum who speak out in favor of Indian children. The novel claim of the article is that the Supreme Court long has used what I term “social contract talk” to demean, dehumanize, and marginalize POC and lower income persons most likely to be subjected to police interventions. This “social contract talk” is not the law, but enables judges to grant police (and prosecutors, though I don’t address them directly) immense discretion to target POC and lower income persons, and to immunize them from legal consequences. Weaponized “social contract talk” recalls the origin of the social contract in America, which enabled and encouraged slavery and dispossession of Indigenous peoples. I offer an alternative to social contract talk rooted in Anishinaabe political philosophy, which encourages inclusion, healing, and accountability. Many tribes have relatively little policing of their territories and a completely different mentality about criminal justice.
Register here:

As part of Michigan Humanities’ commitment to dialogue around critical issues and their connection to the humanities, we are coordinating Bridging Michigan, an online conversation series this summer and fall with a focus on the history of systemic inequities, their current impacts on health, education, and Indigenous rights, and the ways that the arts and humanities are active parts of creating real change.
On Thursday, September 3, from 7 to 8 p.m. (EDT) join Michigan Humanities for an online conversation featuring Eric Hemenway and Matthew L.M. Fletcher discussing the history and current state of Native mascots.
Here are the materials in Davis v. King County (Wash. Ct. App.):
9-27-19 Amended Appellees’ Joint Response Brief
09-09-19 Appellees’ Joint Response Brief
An excerpt:
“Before addressing each of the estate’s arguments, we acknowledge that Davis’s death is tragic and echo the trial court’s sentiment that the application of RCW 4.24.420 here is problematic because it precludes claims where law enforcement officers’ actions and training may have been unreasonable, given their knowledge that the individual they were confronting was suicidal and armed. RCW 4.24.420 prevents courts and juries from reaching the issue of whether law enforcement’s negligence resulted in the loss of life. The statute is clear and precludes our evaluation of these policy questions.”
Here, in National Urban League v. Ross (N.D. Cal.):
Here are the materials in San Carlos Apache Tribe v. Azar (D. Ariz.):
You must be logged in to post a comment.