Here are the briefs in Stockbridge-Munsee Community v. State of New York:
Stockbridge-Munsee Reply Brief
Lower court materials are here.
Author: Matthew L.M. Fletcher
NAICJA Training RFP
Here:
First Circuit Reverses Contempt Citation against Narragansett Indian Tribal Historic Preservation Office
Here is the opinion in the sealed case In re Grand Jury Proceedings:
An excerpt:
A venerable legal Latinism, lex non cogit ad impossibilia, teaches that the law does not compel the impossible. Guided by that august adage, we hold that a subpoena duces tecum compelling the production of documents to a now-defunct grand jury cannot be enforced by civil contempt sanctions before a successor grand jury, and we accordingly vacate the district court’s order holding the appellant in civil contempt. We reject, however, the appellant’s additional contentions that tribal sovereign immunity shielded it from subpoena and that the subpoena was unreasonably broad in scope.
A cautionary note about raising tribal immunity from a federal subpoena:
For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that the subpoena duces tecum was unenforceable after the expiration of the issuing grand jury. We therefore vacate the district court’s order holding NITHPO in civil contempt. In the event a subpoena similar in scope is subsequently issued and NITHPO again challenges its validity, our holdings on tribal sovereign immunity and reasonableness of the subpoena shall apply to any such proceeding.
Michigan COA Reverses ICWA Notice: Casual Disregard of ICWA/MIFPA by Wayne County Court and State Workers/Attorney
Here is the opinion in In re Harrell/Harrell-Marls:
An excerpt:
At a pretrial hearing, the assistant attorney general, respondent’s attorney, and the trial court discussed whether one of the parties was of American Indian heritage for the purposes of the ICWA:
The Court: All right, the petition is authorized. The children have been placed with relatives. What else? I guess—is that it? Did anyone ever ask is there any . . . American Indian heritage in this family? American Indian heritage?
Ms. Safran (attorney for respondent): Do you have any Indian heritage in your family?
The Court: Cherokee, Chippewa.
Ms. Safran: There might be some grand—on the grandmother’s side, what was it? Some time—some type; attenuated.
Ms. Trott (attorney for petitioner): Ms. Topp was told no at the other—
Ms. Safran: Well, we didn’t have all the parties.
Ms. Topp (case worker): I talked to [respondent], as well, in the police station[,] and I was told no.
Ms. Safran: She doesn’t think—
The Court: You don’t have any kind—are you sure it’s American, or, any idea what we’re talking about? I mean, what kind of Indian? Cherokees, Chippewa? I mean, there’s a whole bunch.
Unidentified speaker: I don’t—I don’t know; I can ask.
The Court: And . . . what relative? Grandma? Great-grandma?
Ms. Safran: Your Honor, can we get a date because . . . they want me in [Judge] Slavens[’ courtroom] and I can’t believe it.
The Court: You’ve got to wait just one second. All right, you can investigate and see. That’s pretty distant; great-grandma is pretty far back. So, I’m not gonna demand that we send notice.
Ms. Trott: This is on the paternal side? Or maternal? Of which father?
The Court: On the mother’s side or father? It better be a maternal because right now—all right. You have the right to have this heard by a referee as to all the children . . . or by a judge with or without a jury, and, of course, continued right to an attorney at all hearings. We’re setting this for trial?
Ms. Trott: Yes.
It is clear from the record that the trial court had information, however slight, “suggesting that [a] child, a parent of [a] child, or members of a parent’s family are tribal members,” which was one of the five situations the Supreme Court listed as “sufficient to trigger tribal notice.” In re Morris, 491 Mich at 108 n 18. Specifically, respondent’s attorney informed the court that “there might be some [Indian ancestry] on the grandmother’s side.” Because it is for the tribes to determine a child’s eligibility for membership, In re Fried, 266 Mich App 535, 540; 702 NW2d 192 (2005), the trial court clearly erred when it found that the possibility of Indian heritage in a great-grandmother of one or more of the minor children was too remote to justify the notice required by the ICWA and MCL 712B.9(1).
TIGA Release on Support Letter from Isle of Man
Here:
The Government of the Isle of Man, a recognized world leader in internet gaming, has issued a letter of recognition and support to the Tribal Internet Gaming Alliance (TIGA). The letter can be viewed here. The letter states, in part:
“The Isle of Man (we) are pleased to recognize the treaty organization that is known as the Tribal Internet Gaming Alliance (TIGA). We recognize TIGA’s mission is to facilitate, offer, regulate and promote legal internet gaming on behalf of its member tribes, consistent with the highest standards of security, integrity and accountability and see this as a positive platform from which TIGA members can act together, to facilitate, offer and promote legal internet gaming for the benefit [of] its member tribes.”
The Island’s letter goes on to discuss the possibility of the Isle of Man and TIGA entering into inter-jurisdictional agreements regarding internet gaming: “We understand that the Tribal Internet Gaming Alliance (TIGA) is an inter-governmental treaty organization of sovereign tribes, capable of exercising certain delegated governmental powers on behalf of each member tribe. As such, we would be pleased to engage with TIGA to facilitate the opportunity for TIGA and the Isle of Man jurisdiction to negotiate, enter and/or establish inter-jurisdictional agreements for mutual benefit.”
The TIGA Treaty Council extends its warmest “thank-you” to the Government of the Isle of Man and looks forward to a long and productive international relationship for the mutual benefit of our governments.
TIGA is an inter-tribal treaty organization open to all federally recognized tribes and Alaskan Native Villages. As of February 25, 2014, TIGA has two member tribes that have ratified the TIGA Treaty under tribal law: 1) the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians; and 2) the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians.
In addition to the Letter of Support from the Isle of Man, TIGA has received a Resolution in Support from the Kahnawake Gaming Commission in Canada.
Kirsten Carlson Awarded National Science Foundation to Study Congress and Indian Law Legislation
Here.
Amazing news for Professor Carlson! Her project is titled, “Legal Mobilization, Rights Claims, and Federal Indian Policy Reforms.”
Sixth Circuit Stay Order in Michigan v. Sault Tribe
University of Oklahoma Indian Law Conference
Norman — The University of Oklahoma College of Law, American Indian Law Review and OU Native American Studies Department is hosting its third annual symposium. This year’s “Tribal Sovereignty: A Global Perspective” symposium will highlight the issues indigenous peoples face at the international and regional levels. This includes the ability of indigenous peoples to assert their rights at the United Nations and the Organization of American States, in addition to the ability of tribes to engage economically on an international level.
“Woven into the fabric of the College, Native American Law is central to our strategic vision and an integral part of our curriculum. It is truly our privilege to host extraordinary world leaders to highlight significant issues facing indigenous peoples,” said Dean Joe Harroz.
AUSA Vacancy Announcement in District of New Mexico
The District of New Mexico has posted vacancy announcements for Assistant United States Attorneys on the DOJ Internet and DOJ Intranet web sites. These positions are located in the Albuquerque and/or the Las Cruces, NM Office. If you know of anyone who might be interested in applying, please make sure to direct them to the appropriate link below and advise them to review the complete announcement for full information.
http://www.justice.gov/careers/legal/jobs/14-ausa-nm-1.htm (CRIMINAL)
http://www.justice.gov/careers/legal/jobs/14-ausa-nm-2.htm (CIVIL)
Cert Opposition Briefs in Katie John Appeal
Here are the opposition briefs in Alaska v. Jewell:
Katie John Cert Opp [A second brief with the appendix: AFN Alaska v Jewell BIO app]
Cert petition here.
You must be logged in to post a comment.