Matthew L.M. Fletcher

The panel decision conflicts with the May 19, 2014 decision of the United States Supreme Court in Petrella v.Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc., 134 S.Ct. 132; 188 L.Ed.2d 979 (2014) (Petrella). Petrella held that courts may not override Congress’ judgment and apply equitable defenses to summarily dispose of claims at law filed within a statute of limitations established by Congress. The panel’s Per Curiam decision ruled that Plaintiff-Appellant Stockbridge-Munsee Community’s (Stockbridge) damages claims, which were filed within the congressionally established limitations period, are barred by the Sherrill equitable defense. Stockbridge-Munsee Cmty. v. New York; Slip Op. at 8, 2014 WL 2782191 (2d Cir. June 20, 2014) (Slip Opinion attached as Appendix). The panel’s failure to follow Petrella warrants en banc review under Fed. R. Civ. P. 35.

Panel materials here.

Angela Riley: “Native American Lands and the Supreme Court”

June 30, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Angela Riley has posted her very impressive paper, “Native American Lands and the Supreme Court,” published in the Journal of Supreme Court History, on SSRN.

Here is the abstract:

The Supreme Court has been instrumental in defining legal rights and obligations pertaining to Indian lands since its first path-making decision in the field in Johnson v. McIntosh in 1823. But the groundwork for the Court’s contemplation of such cases predates Supreme Court jurisprudence, and it in fact predates the formation of the Court and the United States itself.

When Europeans first made contact with this continent, they encountered hundreds of indigenous, sovereign nations representing enormous diversity in terms of language, culture, religion, and governance. For those indigenous groups — as is a common attribute of indignity of similarly situated indigenous groups around the world — this land was and is holy land. Indigenous creation stories root Indian people in this continent — Turtle Island to many — as the focal point of life, creation, religion, culture, and language. In the settlement of the country, the colonial powers initially — and the United States subsequently — treated with Indian nations to negotiate the transfer of lands from Indians to Europeans, often in exchange for peace or protection.

Prof. Riley had previously presented this paper to the Supreme Court historical society, which was televised on C-SPAN.

Distribution of a Survey Link: Contemporary Targeted Trafficking of Native Peoples

June 30, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here.

This isn’t a Turtle Talk project, just so that’s clear. Looks very useful, though.

Eighth Circuit Briefs on Reach of Lacey Act in Minnesota Chippewa Tribe Reservations

June 30, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in United States v. Brown:

USA Opening Brief

Appellees Consolidated Brief

Reply Brief TK

Lower court materials here.

Assistant Secretary Decision in Timbisha-Shoshone Tribe Election Dispute

June 30, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here:

Final_Departmental_Decision

Complaint Filed re: Control of Navajo Nation Oil & Gas Company — UPDATED

June 30, 2014July 1, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher4 Comments

UPDATE — Navajo Nation Judicial Branch press release:

NN Judicial Branch Press Release

And a clean copy of the Navajo Nation Supreme Court decision:

NNSC Opinion

Here are the materials so far in Begay v. Begay (D. Ariz.):

1 Complaint

An excerpt:

This is an action for declaratory and injunctive relief arising out of a Navajo Supreme Court decision that violates due process and vitiates a federally issued and approved corporate charter providing for shareholder governance of a corporation formed under federal law.

1-1 Exhibit

3 Plaintiffs Motion for TRO

3-1 Exhibits [NNSC Opinion in Navajo Nation Oil & Gas Company v. Window Rock District Court begins at page 139]

4 Motion for Order to Show Cause