Author: Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Alaska SCT Briefs in Asa’carsarmiut Tribal Council v. Wheeler

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Asa’carsarmiut Tribal Council Opening Brief

Wheeler Response Brief

Asa’carsarmiut Tribal Council Reply

Here are the questions presented (from the opening brief):

1. Whether, in light of this Court’s prior precedents, particularly State v. Native Village of Tanana, 249 P.3d 734 (Alaska 2011), a Superior Court may try a custody action in a matter involving an Alaska Native child without adhering to the requirements of Alaska’s Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (“UCCJEA”), AS 25.30.300, et seq., when a tribal court has previously entered an initial determination regarding the child.
2. Whether the Superior Court erred in interpreting Alaska’s UCCJEA, AS 25.30.300, et. seq., as excluding tribal courts within the meaning of “court” in AS 25.30.909(6) and erred in failing to register the Asa’carsarmiut Tribal Court custody order, in light of the Court’s prior precedents, particularly State v. Native Village of Tanana, 249 P.3d 734 (Alaska 2011).
3. Whether the Superior Court erred in concluding that it had “at least concurrent jurisdiction over the issue of Jacob’s custody,” and proceeded to enter an initial child custody determination without giving comity to or contacting the Asa‘carsarmiut Tribal Court and requesting that the Asa‘carsarmiut Tribal Court determine that it no longer had exclusive, continuing jurisdiction or, alternatively, establishing that the Superior Court “would be a more convenient forum.”
4. Whether, if it is found that the Superior Court properly had jurisdiction to modify the Asa’carsarmiut Tribal Court order pursuant to AS 25.30.320, the Superior Court erred by failing to enter an Order Modifying Custody that stated its authority to modify the Asa‘carsarmiut Tribal Court order as well as its findings regarding a *3 substantial change of circumstances, pursuant to AS 25.20.110 rather than a Final Custody Decree and Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.
5. Whether, in light of the Court’s prior precedent, particularly John v. Baker, 982 P.2d 738 (Alaska 1999), a Superior Court may try a custody action in a matter involving an Alaska Native child without engaging in a comity analysis when a tribal court had previously entered a custody order regarding the child.

 

Ninth Circuit Briefs in Hopland Band of Pomo Indians v. Jewell (ISDEAA Law Enforcement Funding)

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Hopland Band Opening Brief

Federal Answer Brief

Hopland Reply Brief

Lower court materials here:

21 Tribal Motion for Summary J

32 US Motion for Summary J

32-1 Cruzan Declaration

34 Tribal Response

38 US Reply

55 DCT Order

We posted on this case here and here.

Opening Ninth Circuit Brief in Yakama/King Mountain Tax Dispute with US

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opening brief in Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Indian Nation v. Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau:

Yakama Opening Brief

Lower court materials in King Mountain Tobacco Co. v. Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (E.D. Wash.) are here.

Indigenous Law Journal Fall 2014 Call for Submissions

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Call For Submissions-Fall 2014 doc form

Federal Court Dismisses IFP Complaint against Salt River Police

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Phillips v. Salt River Police Dept. (D. Ariz.):

13 2d Amended Complaint

21 DCT Order Dismissing 2d Amended Complaint

Organized Village of Saxman Sues Interior over Subsistence Rights

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the complaint in Organized Village of Saxman v. Towarak (D. Alaska):

Complaint

An excerpt:

This action seeks declaratory and injunctive relief under section 807 of the Alaska National Interests Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA), 16 U.S.C. § 3117, to prevent the Secretaries of Interior and Agriculture from implementing a 2007 final rule that administratively grouped the rural community of Saxman with the nonrural cvcommunity of Ketchikan. Only residents of communities identified by the Federal Subsistence Board (FSB) as rural are eligible for ANILCA’s subsistence priority. 50 C.F.R. 100.5 § (2013). By grouping Saxman with Ketchikan, the 2007 final rule removes Saxman’s rural status and effectively eliminates Saxman’s priority for subsistence uses set forth in ANILCA section 804, 16 U.S.C. § 3114, thus denying Saxman’s members continued access to the subsistence resources they depend on as a mainstay of their livelihood in violation of section 811 of ANILCA, 16 U.S.C. § 3121, and the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. § 553, 706(2)(a),(d).

Correspondence between DOJ and Alaska AG re: Tribal Court Protection Orders

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

In his letter to Alaska Attorney General Mike Geraghty, AAG Tony West notes that the State of Alaska is legally obligated under federal law to honor tribal-court protection orders, regardless of whether those orders were previously registered or filed in State court. He further offers assistance to bring the State into compliance with Federal law.

Here is that correspondence:

6-26-14 Letter from Alaska Attorney General to Associate Attorney General Tony West

Letter from AAG West to AG Geraghty (July 28 2014)

Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate Public Defender Job Posting

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Sisseton PD Posting

Briefs in Cherokee Nation Challenge to Interior’s Decision to Acquire Trust Land for United Keetoowah Band

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here are the updated materials in Cherokee Nation v. Jewell (N.D. Okla.):

132 Cherokee Nation Brief

135 Interior Response

136 UKB Response

139 Cherokee Nation Reply

News coverage of the oral argument is here.

Prior posts on this case here, here, and here.

NPR Segment Profiles Ojibwe.net

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

NPR has “For Rare Languages, Social Media Provide New Hope” here.

An excerpt:

The creators and contributors of Ojibwe.net — a website that seeks to preserve Anishinaabemowin, an endangered Native American language from Michigan — use Facebook in a similar manner.

Ojibwe.net contributor Margaret Noodin is an assistant professor of English and American Indian Studies at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. The language has 8,000-10,000 speakers, she says. But most of the native speakers are over 70 years old, placing the language under threat.

“That’s the most dangerous thing. There are very few young kids that are growing up in a fluent environment,” Noodin says.