Author: Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Nooksack Update: Rabang v. Kelly II (9th Cir.); Doucette v. Bernhardt (W.D. Wash))

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

District court materials (prior post here):

28 Doucette v. Bernhardt 3-7-19 Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment

32 Doucette v. Bernhardt 4-18-19 Defendants’ Consolidated Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment and in Support of Defendants’ Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment

33 Doucette v. Bernhardt 5-10-19 Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Reply in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment and in Opposition to Defendants’ Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment

34 Doucette v. Bernhardt 5-31-19 Reply re Defendants’ Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment

Ninth Circuit materials:

35 Rabang v. Kelly II 6-13-19 Stay Order

Federal Claims Court Finds US Breached Investment Duty to Western Shoshone

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Western Shoshone Identifiable Group v. United States (Fed. Cl.):

34 Second Amended Complaint

37 DCT Order Denying Motion to Dismiss

151 Plaintiffs Post Trial Brief

156 US Post Trial Brief

157 Plaintiff Reply

173 DCT Order

Montana Law Review Browning Symposium Issue

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Transcript

PDF

2018 James R. Browning Symposium Keynote
Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Articles

PDF

Sovereign Metaphors in Indian Law
Gregory Ablavsky

PDF

Tribal Nations and Congress’s Power to Define Offences Against the Law of Nations
John H. Dossett

PDF

From Foundational Law to Limiting Principles in Federal Indian Law
Alexander T. Skibine

Essay

PDF

On Indian Children and the Fifth Amendment
Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Note

PDF

United States v. Gillette: A Tiny Prairie Casenote Opening a Window on the Enveloping Fog Obscuring the Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968
Frank Pommersheim

Poem

PDF

Buddha Speaks Wisdom at the University of Montana Law Review Symposium on Indian Law
Frank Pommersheim

 

U of A: Master of Professional Studies in Indigenous Governance

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Master of Professional Studies (MPS) in Indigenous Governance

Working professionals seeking training in indigenous governance leadership now have more educational opportunities, thanks to flexible new offerings from the University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law’s Indigenous Peoples Law and Policy Program and the University of Arizona Native Nations Institute.

Beginning in the spring 2020 semester, students can pursue a Master of Professional Studies (MPS) in indigenous governance through an expanded hybrid model that offers classes both in person and online and allows students to finish the degree in one year. The degree was previously only available in person.

 

https://law.arizona.edu/news/2019/06/new-flexible-master-of-professional-studies-in-indigenous-governance

Profile of Pokagon Band Citizen Jordan Brewer Playing for Michigan in College World Series

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is “Brewer Discusses Whirlwind of Success This Season, Support of His Tribe.”

SCOTUS Confirms Dual Sovereignty Exception to Double Jeopardy Clause [over powerful RBG dissent]

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opinion in Gamble v. United States.

Prior posts on this case here.

National Indian Law Library Bulletin (6/13/2019)

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

The National Indian Law Library added new content to the Indian Law Bulletins on 6/13/19.

U.S. Supreme Court Bulletin 
http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/sct/2018-2019update.html
The following cases were recently denied review: 
King Mountain Tobacco Company, Inc. v. United States  (Treaties; Taxation) 
Mitchell, et al. v. Tulalip Tribes of Washington (Sovereign Immunity)
Teck Metals LTD v. The Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation (Hazardous Waste)

Federal Courts Bulletin
https://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/federal/2019.html
Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe v. United States Department of Agriculture  (Hemp Production)
Pauma Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the Pauma and Yuima Reservation v. Unite Here International Union (National Labor Relations Board) 
Rincon Mushroom Corporation of America v. B.M., J.C., V.W., G.P., S.S., C.K., D.W., DOE CO., DOE I, DOE II  (Exhaustion of Tribal Court Remedies)

Law Review & Bar Journal Bulletin (contact us if you need help finding a copy of an article) 
https://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/lawreviews/2019.html

  • Resilience and Native girls: A critique.
  • Sovereign metaphors in Indian law. 
  • The restatement of the law for American Indians: The process and why it matters.
  • Tribal nations and Congress’s power to define offences against the law of nations.
  • From foundational law to limiting principles in federal Indian law. 
  • United States v. Gillette: A tiny prairie casenote opening a window on the enveloping fog obscuring the Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968. 
  • Native American religious accommodations, national parks, and the Cutter test.
  • Reversing course on environmental justice under the Trump administration. 

News Bulletin
https://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/news/currentnews.html
In the Health & Welfare section, we feature an article about a tribe taking on a management role for a troubled Indian Health Service hospital. 

Legislation Bulletin 
https://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/legislation/116_uslegislation.html
The following bills were added: 
S.288: Justice for Native Survivors of Sexual Violence Act.
H.R.1373: Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act.

Regulatory Bulletin
http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/regulatory/2019.html
The Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Indian Education, has proposed a rule relating to standards, assessments, and accountability. 

Allie Maldonado Book Signing at McLean & Eakin June 20

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here.

Federal Court Thins Down Claims against US/Isleta Pueblo in Dog Head Fire Matter

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the order in De Baca v. United States (D.N.M.):

209-dct-order.pdf

Briefs TK.

Michael Doran on Tribal Sovereignty and Fundamental Rights

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Michael Doran has posted “Redefining Tribal Sovereignty for the Era of Fundamental Rights” on SSRN. It is forthcoming in the Indiana Law Journal.

The abstract:

This article explains a longstanding problem in federal Indian law. For two centuries, the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly acknowledged the retained, inherent sovereignty of American Indian tribes. But more recently, the Court has developed the implicit-divestiture theory to deny tribal governments criminal and civil jurisdiction over non-members, even with respect to activities on tribal lands. Legal scholars have puzzled over this move from a territorial-based definition of tribal sovereignty to a membership-based definition; they have variously explained it as the Court’s abandonment of the foundational principles of Indian law, the product of the Court’s indifference or even racist hostility to Indians, or a simple lack of doctrinal coherence in the Court’s decisions. This article provides a different explanation. The implicit-divestiture cases represent the Court’s effort to address a trilemma among three incompatible objectives: preservation of the traditional territorial-based definition of tribal sovereignty; preservation of tribal governments’ placement outside the federalist structure of the constitutional order; and preservation of fundamental rights. The Court has chosen to resolve the trilemma by redefining tribal sovereignty to deny tribal jurisdiction over non-members. Whether right or wrong, the implicit-divestiture theory is the Court’s good-faith attempt to preserve as much tribal sovereignty as possible without infringing on fundamental rights or forcing tribal governments into the federalist structure.