Matthew L.M. Fletcher

The 1491s love Jim Thorpe (I think) but not his captor, winning with 93 percent of the vote. Potheads didn’t get out of bed yesterday, so the Cobell settlement beneficiaries had an easy time garnering 73 percent of the vote.

I guess I forget, being in Michigan, that Cobell’s billions are pretty influential. This will be an interesting match-up. The 1491s better hope the beneficiaries aren’t out there buying votes.

#4 Gray wolves v. #5 Cohen Handbook

Ma’iingan feasted on the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, with 63 percent of the vote. The entire state of New Mexico was no match for the Cohen Handbook leviathan, barely netting 29 percent of the vote.

Are the law profs hunters? Or will the wolves outthink them? Whozit gonna be?

#2 Tribal Supreme Court v.#10 Tribal In-House Counsel Association

TLPI nearly pulls off the largest upset of the tournament by defeating the Supreme Court Project but fades late, garnering only 44 percent of the vote. The young upstart TICA wins over NABA by one vote!

#3 Law Reviews on Adoptive Couple v.#6 Carcieri challengers

Well, sheer numbers mean something, plus an extra year to deliberate. Adoptive Couple defeats Bay Mills with 62 percent of the vote. Controversy reigns in the Carcieri v. payday lending crowd, but Carcieri must scare (or excite) voters more, winning with 59 percent of the vote.

Who Won American Indian Law and Policy, 2014, Second Round, Bracket 3 of 4

January 8, 2015January 8, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Now we move on to the quarterfinals of Category 3, People and Parties.

#1 Hon. Diane Humetewa v. #8 Bill Wood

Hun, Judge Humetewa only won 89 percent of votes. Has she already presided over the criminal cases of 11 percent of TT readers and their friends and families? 🙂

I think Professor Wood’s in for a rough quarterfinal. Sorry brother. But you beat Dollar General, getting nearly two-thirds of the vote!

#4 Sarah Deer v. #5 Hon. Kevin Washburn

In a battle of two geniuses, Prof. Deer prevails with 70 percent of the vote. In the battle of two feds, the assistant secretary prevails with 71 percent. This next round is going to be a clash of titans.

#2 Justice Sonia Sotomayor v. #10 Frank Pommersheim

We believe that, based on the fact that Justice Sotomayor only won 90 percent of the vote, our alum J.S. voted at least five times. 🙂

Justice Sotomayor will face Frank Pommersheim, who narrowly defeated Judge Canby, who did not, as far as I know, get much of the haiku vote, with 55 percent of the vote.

This sets up my favorite match-up — a tale of two New Yorkers! Erin Lane, where are you?

#3 Hon. Keith Harper v. #11 Structuring Sovereignty

Ambassador Harper won easily over Chris Deschene, with 69 percent of the vote. The win of the authors of Structuring Sovereignty by a 71 percent to 29 percent vote was somewhat surprising (to me anyway). I guess it’s too late to Bear Down, Arizona.

Who Won American Indian Law and Policy, 2014, Second Round, Bracket 2 of 4

January 8, 2015January 7, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Now we move on to the Category 2 quarterfinals.

#1 Indian Child Welfare Act v. #9 Indian country voting rights

The litigation and public policy juggernaut that is ICWA defeated federal Indian preemption(the previous generation’s juggernaut) with 64 percent of the vote. Indian country voting rights prevailed over Rule 19 with 62 percent of the vote. Where my Rule 19 peeps?

This one is an old-fashioned clash of civil rights.

#4 Indian gaming v. #5 Intra-tribal disputes

Indian gaming beat out internet gaming, barely, with only 90 percent of the vote. In a battle of bad news, intra-tribal disputes knocked out human trafficking with 2/3 of the vote.

Great match-up here. Can we have one without the other? Well, looking back at the ICRA cases of the 1970s, I’d say we don’t need much to generate intra-tribal disputes, heh heh.

#2 Tribal sovereign immunity v. #7 American Indian education

Sovereign immunity beat out alternative energy with 92 percent of the vote. Did it use a sword or a shield? Education, we all need, won with 63 percent; climate change, we don’t need it, was a no-show.

Which came first, immunity or the knowledge that sovereigns are immune? Bill Wood knows, I bet.

#3 VAWA v. #6 Tribal court exhaustion

VAWA took three-quarters of the vote from criminal sentencing. Can’t sentence without convicting first, right?Tribal court exhaustion won almost as easily, with 72 percent of the vote over the new general welfare legislation. Ironically, tribal court exhaustion is all about adjudicating even without jurisdiction. Now I’m confused.

Who Won American Indian Law and Policy 2014, Second Round, Bracket 1 of 4

January 8, 2015January 7, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher

32 are in, 32 are out. Let’s proceed to the eight remaining in Category 1, Indian nations.

#1 Alaska Native tribes v. #8 Omaha Tribe

The Alaska Natives tribes, my overall top seed, took 95 percent of the first round vote. The Omaha Tribe took 75 percent, easily routing the Kialegee Tribal Town.

#4 Cayuga Indian Nation v. # 12 Oneida Tribe of Wisconsin

All-Haudenosaunee quarterfinal! Cayuga took a narrow victory over the Big Lagoon Rancheria, with 58 percent of the vote. MHA Nation is taking some bad press lately, and the Wisconsin Oneidas wiped the floor with them, taking 77 percent of the vote.

#2 Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians v. #7 Gun Lake Tribe

All Michigan ‘Shinob quarterfinal. Sault Tribe took 64 percent of the vote over Fond du Lac, and I’m sure it’s not because of their sheer enrollment numbers. Or was it? Gun Lake, which took 2/3 of the vote from the Wind River Tribes, better hope not.

#3 Bay Mills Indian Community v. # 11 Lac Courte Oreilles and other Wisconsin treaty tribes

Bay Mills eked its way out of the first round with 51 percent of the vote over Cowlitz; apparently winning a Supreme Court case isn’t all that impressive compared to a win in federal district court. Huh.

Unlike Sault Tribe, enrollment numbers didn’t help Navajo, which lost handily to the Wisconsin treaty tribes, 63-37. Wisconsin’s not giving up on that treaty case, so stay tuned there.

The Onion: “Supreme Court Releases Young Scalia’s Audition Tape”

January 7, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here.

SCOTUSBlog Lists Seminole Tribe v. Florida as Petition to Watch for Friday’s Conference

January 7, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here. And the cert stage briefs here.

I predict a decent chance for a CVSG but the Court ultimately will deny this one.

Lower court materials and my commentary here.

Wisconsin Files Cert Petition in Night Deer Hunting Case

January 7, 2015April 20, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here is the petition in Wisconsin v. Lac Courte Oreilles Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians:

Wisconsin Petition for Writ of Certiorari

Question presented:

A moving party under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(5) must show a significant change in factual conditions or law that renders continued enforcement of a judgment detrimental to the public interest. The proceeding is not a relitigation of the underlying judgment. Here, the Seventh Circuit shifted the burden to the non-moving party (Wisconsin) to justify an underlying judgment that night hunting of deer was fundamentally unsafe. Does Rule 60(b)(5) permit shifting the burden to the non-moving party to justify the original judgment?

LCO Cert Opp

Seventh Circuit materials here.

Who Won Indian Law and Policy 2014? First Round Bracket — 8 of 8

January 7, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Last one for the day!

Still on category 4, groups.

# 2 Tribal Supreme Court Project

They’ve need a win, and Bay Mills was a biggie! While they were unable to persuade SCOTUS not to take the case in the first (even the SG failed there), and they were unable to persuade the tribe not to bring this case in the first place, but that said, they did help tribal interests avoid problems in a lot of other cases (here, here, here, here, and here). Actually, I have no idea if they helped or not but we’ll give them some credit anyway.

# 15 Tribal Law and Policy Institute

Always been a big fan of Jerry Gardner and his crew. One of the funniest men around. Did amazing work on the Attorney General’s Advisory Committee on American Indian and Alaska Native Children Exposed to Violence Report this year.

#7 Native American Bar Association

NABA will be releasing a report arising out of a survey that over 500 Indian lawyers completed this year, so maybe this posting is a year early.

#10 Tribal In-House Counsel Association

New organization that has the potential to revolutionize the practice of law in Indian country. I’m hoping that TICA members will be able to cut through a lot of this in the coming generation.

#3 Authors of law review articles on Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl

Yes, there’s a lot, lot, lot of these out there. Some are brilliant and inspiring, some are, well, kinda scary.

#14 Authors of law review articles on Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community

Not as many, and most are less scary. Here, here, here, here. Some are just weird.

# 6 Carcieri challengers

The people, groups, tribes, and states and state subdivisions that want to use a poorly-reasoned Supreme Court decision to stop Indian gaming at all costs are legion. Samples here, here, here, here, here, here, and elsewhere (just type Carcieri into TT’s search engine). Interior has opined about it here.

# 11 Tribal sovereign lenders

Yep.