Here:
Reply brief TK
Lower court materials here.
Author: Matthew L.M. Fletcher
Pa. High School Student Newspaper Editor: “My High School Mascot Is Offensive”
Here. An excerpt:
When I raised my hand to vote in a classroom at Neshaminy High School nearly 18 months ago, I was unaware of the battle I was about to ignite as editor-in-chief of The Playwickian, my school’s newspaper. In the fall of 2013, one of my fellow editors began a conversation about our school mascot, which is also the name of every sports team at our school and our school’s nickname. This would soon become a national controversy over our use of a racist mascot and a legal battle over the amount of control students have over their publications in public schools.
This mascot is the “Redskin.” It has been consistently criticized by a Native American parent within our Pennsylvania school district for its derogatory and hateful connotation. The paper’s staff and I came to a consensus that we should listen to what this parent had to say and start a conversation about the future use of the mascot, given how offensive it is to Native Americans. We debated, did our research, and ultimately came to a vote—14-7—in favor of removing the mascot—and the football team’s name—entirely from our newspaper, essentially forming a new policy. Both the majority and the dissenting sides wrote editorials, and we went to press Oct. 23, 2013.
—Brent Greenwood for Education Week; image text from Winona Daily Republican, 1863As the editor-in-chief since 2013, I continue to face reproach for this decision, including the possibility of criminal charges, as well as a lot of social-media bashing by my peers and the parents in my school district.
Minnesota COA Affirms State Rules Limiting Non-Indian Fish Harvest on Mille Lacs Lake
Here is the opinion in Save Mille Lacs Sportsfishing v. Minnesota Dept. of Natural Resources:
Yankton Sioux Tribe Press Release on Rapid City Hockey Racial Incident
Here:
2015 Young Native Writers Essay Contest
Here.
The description:
The Young Native Writers Essay Contest is a writing contest for Native American high school students and is designed to encourage young Native Americans to write about their experiences as a member of a Native American community and the culture that inspires them.
The voices that emerge from this program honor the legacy of every Native American who has ever lived. Add your words to the thousands submitted through this project – all writers receive a Certificate of Honor for their submission.
The Holland & Knight Charitable Foundation’s goal of promoting education and creating new opportunities for youth has inspired this essay contest. Partnering with Holland & Knight in this endeavor are the National Museum of the American Indian and the National Indian Education Association.
Paul Spruhan Article: “Indian Law on State Bar Exams In the Age of the Uniform Bar Examination”
Cynthia Ford Article about Evidence Rules in Montana Tribal Courts…
in this month’s edition of the Montana Lawyer (see page 14).
Federal Court Rejects Nonmember’s Challenge to Colorado River Indian Tribe’s Jurisdiction; Reservation Boundaries Challenge Unresolved
Here is the order in French v. Starr (D. Ariz.):
An excerpt:
Finding no impediment to this Court’s application of the doctrine of estoppel against Plaintiff, the Court concludes that Plaintiff is precluded by the terms of the Permit and by his conduct from asserting to this Court in the instant federal action that the lot he leased from CRIT was not within the boundaries of the Reservation to resist a determination that the Tribal Court had jurisdiction over the action brought by CRIT to evict Plaintiff and for damages. See Wendt, 2003 WL 21750676, at *5. The Court would also conclude that the Tribal Court properly applied the doctrine of estoppel to find its own jurisdiction in the underlying action, even though the lot may or may not be within the boundaries of the Reservation. The equitable considerations raised in this dispute— most notably, the policy of promoting tribal self-government and the development of tribal courts, see Iowa Mut. Ins. Co., 480 U.S. at 16-17, the recognition of a tribe’s inherent authority to exclude, see Water Wheel, 642 F.3d at 812-13, and the recognition of the government’s role as trustee of reservation land on behalf of the tribes, see Ruby, 588 F.2d at 704-05—weigh in favor of the Tribal Court’s application of the doctrine of estoppel to determine its jurisdiction in this matter.
And:
In concluding that this Plaintiff is estopped from asserting that the lot he leased from CRIT was not within the Reservation, the Court recognizes that the issue of the location of the Reservation’s boundary remains unresolved. Defendants rightly point out that, in the absence of estoppel, Plaintiff would have to overcome other obstacles in challenging CRIT’s title to the lot—none of which the Court need examine here— including whether the statute of limitations period has run on a challenge to the location of the Reservation’s boundary, whether the Secretary’s determination of the Reservation’s boundary is subject to collateral attack, and whether the United States and CRIT are indispensable parties to such a challenge under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19.
Briefs are here.
News coverage here.
Iowa COA Affirms Misdemeanor Traffic Ticket over Challenge from Sac and Fox Tribal Member
Here is the opinion in Young v. State:
You must be logged in to post a comment.