Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Guest Post: Bill Rastetter on Judge Enslen

February 25, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

From long-time Grand Traverse Band counsel Bill Rastetter on the passing of Judge Enslen:

Writing this helps me to reflect upon not just Richard Enslen but also the two other Western District judges appointed by Jimmy Carter — all of whom made major rulings for Grand Traverse Band. (There’s a story there, if I ever could find the time; I’d start the story by talking with Dean Robb who was in the group of lawyers picked by the two Democratic Senators who came up with a list of possible nominees, including “progressives” who never would be considered in the present climate.) Those three were Richard Enslen, Douglas Hillman, and Benjamin Gibson. In retrospect, each individual evidenced concern for the plight of the less advantaged, the powerless within our society; and GTB’s victories might not have occurred if they had not been on the bench.

Gibson left Michigan long before retirement age, but not before he granted GTB its first victory in the modern (restored) era: Leelanau Indians, Inc. and Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians v. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (W.D. Mich. File No. G 80-526): 502 F.Supp. 741 (W.D. Mich. 1980).

Hillman? Well, there’s the major case [Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians v. U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Michigan, et al. (W.D. Mich. File No. 1:96-CV-466): 198 F.Supp.2d 920 (W.D. Mich. 2002), and 46 F.Supp.2d 689 (W.D. Mich. 1999), aff’d. 369 F.3d 960 (6th Cir. 2004)] which easily could have been resolved differently if another judge had been assigned that case.*

And Enslen. Even before the “treaty-fishing” cases, he granted the judgment declaring that GTB controlled the Peshawbestown lands. [Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians v. Leelanau County and Leelanau Indians, Inc. (W.D. Mich. File No. G 83-834)] Attached is his unpublished opinion; it’s the only time my proposed findings and conclusions have been adopted verbatim (without even being retyped). And he was assigned the GTB v. BIA case [Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians v. Bureau of Indian Affairs, et al. (W.D. Mich. File No. G 85-382)], by which we (with his help/not so subtle messages to DOJ that he’d grant preliminary injunction for us if …) held them (the Reagan administration DOI political operatives) at bay until Buddy Raphael negotiated the “compromise” membership provisions. Both the 1985 and 2000 consent decrees were the result of his commitment to ADR (and at various times he forcefully let lawyers for state/”sports” groups know that they really didn’t want to give him a chance to rule for the Tribes); likewise, he allowed the Tribes plenty of maneuvering room leading up to the 2007 “inland” consent decree. Also his July 15, 1986 opinion/order in which he fashioned a remedy in GTB’s favor when the other COTFMA Tribes (BMIC & SSM) decided they could distribute 1985 CD funds by majority vote (subsequently there have been equal 1/3 and then 1/5 distributions of appropriated funds above each Tribe’s base). Finally, of course, is GTB’s “access” case now in the textbooks: Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians v. Director, Michigan Department of Natural Resources, et al. (W.D. Mich. File No. 1:94-CV-707): 971 F.Supp. 282 (1995), aff’d. 141 F.3d 635 (6th Cir. 1998), cert. denied 454 U.S. 1124, 102 S.Ct. 971 (1998).

____________________

* Here is an article that appeared later in the New Yorker, written by his niece about his mother. I was struck by the passage on the last page. Here was a man who rose to the top of a prestigious G.R. law firm, probably relatively conservative albeit a Democrat in conservative G.R. and (I think) a labor lawyer, but I’m not aware of any indication that he was champion of the downtrodden. Perhaps his mother instilled a sense of (in)justice, and when the opportunity presented itself he saved the day for the Indian Tribes. [United States v. Bay Mills Indian Community, et al. (W.D. Mich. File No. M 85-335): 692 F. Supp. 777 (W.D. Mich. 1988), vacated 727 F. Supp. 1110 (W.D. Mich. 1989)] GTB gets no credit for Judge Hillman’s decision not to enjoin the Tribes’ casino gaming, yet it was our separate brief (and affidavits of Buddy Raphael and Barry Burtt) that argued Rule 65 equitable considerations weighed against the injunction requested by DOJ.

Navajo Presidential Election Set for April 21

February 25, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – Presidential election set for April 21st

Univ. of Kansas Scholars on Protecting Indigenous Knowledge in the Age of Climate Change

February 25, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Joseph Brewer II and Elizabeth Ann Kronk Warner have posted “Guarding Against Exploitation: Protecting Indigenous Knowledge in the Age of Climate Change” on SSRN.

Here is the abstract:

Indigenous knowledge has the potential to ameliorate the extreme, destructive impacts of climate change. Given their enduring connection to place, indigenous communities are the subjects of knowledge acquisition relevant to the changing climate. Yet, because this traditional knowledge has been exploited by outsiders, indigenous communities may be wary to share such valuable information with individuals outside of their communities. And, even if traditional knowledge is shared, indigenous peoples may wish to maintain control over its use to guard against exploitation. This article addresses concerns associated with the stewarding of such traditional knowledge, in hopes of providing legal structure to the conversation. As the application of traditional knowledge becomes more apparent in the climate change context, a conversation to invoke action in the academy and legal systems is needed to create structures that value as well as protect the complexities of indigenous community-based research. Ultimately, this article strives to explore methods of holding those who seek and steward traditional knowledge accountable to indigenous communities. To accomplish this goal, this article examines traditional knowledge held by tribes within the United States that may prove helpful in the fight against the deleterious impacts of climate change. Then, having identified valuable knowledge possessed by tribes, the article goes on to examine the potential for existing domestic and international law to protect against the exploitation of such knowledge. After concluding that the existing law provides inadequate protection at best, the article asserts that tribes may be better served by enacting their own tribal laws to protect against such exploitation, and then explores the existing tribal law enacted to protect tribal traditional knowledge. This is the first article to provide concrete examples of traditional knowledge useful in combating the impacts of climate change and how the law may apply in such instances. This is also the first article to examine the use of tribal law to address the protection of traditional knowledge in-depth and provide a discussion of how some tribes are already utilizing tribal law to accomplish such goals. Accordingly, this article constitutes an important addition to the scholarship surrounding protection of traditional knowledge.

Reported California COA Opinion Reverses Termination of Parental Rights for Violation of ICWA

February 25, 2015February 25, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Ventura County Human Services Agency initially told the juvenile court that ICWA doesn’t apply to Alaska Natives (or, as stated in the opinion, “Eskimo families”).

Here is the opinion in In re H.G.:

In re HG — B255712

Washington Football Team Argues Lanham Act/TTAB Decision Violates First and Fifth Amendments

February 24, 2015February 24, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the opening brief in Pro-Football Inc. v. Blackhorse (E.D. Va.):

53 DCT Order on Briefing Schedule

56 Pro-Football Motion for Summary J on Constitutional Claims

According to the briefing schedules, briefs are going to be flying fast and furious. We’ll try to keep up.

Prior materials on the federal government intervention here, and the now-denied motion to dismiss here.

Western Sky Financial v. Jackson Cert Stage Materials

February 24, 2015April 10, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here:

Western Sky v Jackson Cert Petition

Jackson Cert Opp Brief

Western Sky Cert Stage Reply

Questions presented:

I. Whether the validity of an arbitration clause is determined exclusively by the statutory requirements of the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”), as held by the First, Fourth, Fifth, and Eleventh Circuits – or by a common-law “reasonableness” test, as held by the Seventh Circuit below?

II. Whether a court may apply a state law defense in a manner that disfavors arbitration by voiding an entire arbitration clause merely because the contractually-designated arbitrator is unavailable, notwithstanding the FAA’s express directive to appoint a substitute arbitrator?

III. Whether the Seventh Circuit erroneously – and in conflict with the Second and Eighth Circuits – required a non-tribal-member’s physical entry onto the relevant Indian reservation in connection with a transaction with a tribal member before ordering tribal court exhaustion of judicial claims arising from the transaction?

Lower court materials here.

Nooksack Disenrollments Enjoined

February 24, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is a news article noting that Judge Doucet ruled from the bench.

An excerpt:

In a hearing Monday afternoon, Feb. 23, Nooksack Tribal Court Judge pro tem Randy Doucet held with the court’s previous rulings: Until tribal council has final word from the Secretary of the Department of the Interior, they may not disenroll anyone, said lawyers for the affected members. A reporter was not allowed in the courtroom as only five people for each side were admitted.

Briefs:

2-10-15 Plaintiffs’ Emergency Motion To Enforce Injuction Orders

2-10-15 Plaintiffs’ Response in Opposition To Defendants Notice of Compliance

2-19-15 Defendants’ Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Emergency Motion to Enforce Injunction Orders

2-20-15 Reply Re Plaintiffs’ Emergency Motion to Enforce Injunction Orders