On May 18, 2026, in Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians v. Howe, the petition for a writ of certiorari to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit was granted, the judgment was vacated, and the case was remanded to the Eighth Circuit in light of Louisiana v. Callais (2026). You can see the order here.
You can see the cert petition here and Eighth Circuit materials here. You can see more about the Supreme Court’s decision in Louisiana v. Callais here and the opinion here.
On May 15, 2026, the Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation (NHLC), the Native American Rights Fund (NARF), and Hobbs, Straus, Dean & Walker, LLP filed a Motion to Intervene on behalf of Papa Ola Lōkahi in a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Native Hawaiian Health Scholarship Program. The lawsuit, brought by Do No Harm, targets a program rooted in Congress’s longstanding recognition of the United States government’s trust responsibilities to Native Hawaiians.
And here is the complaint.
Here is the Fourth Circuit’s decision vacating the lower court’s dismissal and holding that the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) applies in Winnebago v. Department of the Army.
The ruling allows the Tribe to proceed with its lawsuit against the U.S. Army seeking repatriation of the remains of Samuel Gilbert and Edward Hensley, two Winnebago boys who died at the Carlisle Indian Industrial School more than 125 years ago.
The Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska’s Chairman, Chairman Brown stated, “The Fourth Circuit’s ruling brings joy to the Tribe. As the Court recognized, it would be a disservice to find NAGPRA does not protect the Winnebago’s right to bring home Samuel Gilbert and Edward Hensley for proper burials, according to our traditional practices. NAGPRA is an important statute our relatives fought for and is meant to “address the desires of Indians to bury their dead,” a right “for too long ignored.”
NARF Senior Staff Attorney Beth Margaret Wright explains, “Winnebago’s lawsuit demonstrates its commitment to honor its ancestors and its children; Winnebago continues to advocate for its rights under NAGPRA to bring Samuel and Edward home and provide them with the Tribal burials they were denied over 125 years ago. The Fourth Circuit recognized that Congress enacted NAGPRA as a remedy for this ‘shameful injustice.’”
“This is an extraordinarily important decision not only for the Winnebago Tribe, but for Tribal Nations across the country seeking to ensure that federal agencies finally comply with the laws enacted to help address the profound and multigenerational trauma inflicted by the federal Indian boarding school system,” said Greg Werkheiser of Cultural Heritage Partners, co-counsel for the Tribe.
On April 1, 2026, the Indian Peaks Band of the Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah filed a Notice of Appeal and Petition for Stay with the Interior Board of Land Appeals (IBLA), challenging the Bureau of Land Management’s March 2, 2026, approval of the Pine Valley Water Supply Project.
The filing seeks review of BLM’s decision authorizing a large‑scale groundwater extraction and pipeline project in southern Utah and asks the IBLA to stay the project approvals while the appeal is pending. The Band argues that the decision violates federal law, including the National Environmental Policy Act, and unlawfully threatens the Band’s federally reserved water rights and culturally significant resources.
You can see more here.
On April 1, 2026, the four Wabanaki Nations — the Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians, the Mi’kmaq Nation, the Passamaquoddy Tribe, and the Penobscot Nation — represented by the Native American Rights Fund and co-counsel filed an unopposed motion to intervene in Oxford Casino Hotel, et al. v. Champion in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine. On April 2, 2026, the district court granted the Nations’ motion. The Nations’ intervention ensures their voices are represented in a lawsuit challenging Maine’s new internet gaming law, An Act to Create Economic Opportunity for the Wabanaki Nations Through Internet Gaming, a statute that is important to unique Tribal economic and sovereign interests.
Previous post on this matter is here.
The law, enacted earlier this year, establishes a regulatory framework allowing the Wabanaki Nations to seek licenses to operate internet gaming in Maine. The statute is designed to support Tribal self-determination and create economic opportunities that strengthen the Wabanaki governments and their ability to provide for their communities. The Nations are the direct beneficiaries of the law and have significant sovereign, economic, and constitutional interests at stake in the litigation.
The lawsuit, brought by Oxford Casino Hotel and others, seeks to invalidate the law on constitutional grounds. By granting the Wabanaki Nations’ motion to intervene, the court has allowed the Nations to participate as party defendants to defend the law and protect their unique sovereign right as governments to pursue economic development in order to fund essential government programs, services and infrastructure.
Leaders of the Wabanaki Nations emphasized the importance of intervening to safeguard economic sovereignty and shared prosperity across Maine.
Chief Francis, Penobscot Nation: “Our intervention in Oxford v. Champion is about the future — for our people and for all of rural Maine. This law gives the Penobscot Nation a fair chance to build jobs, fund essential services, and partner across communities to heal long-standing economic disparities, while recognizing our unique politic status as a Tribal Nation. We look forward to the opportunity to defend this law and our right to economic self-determination.”
Chief Sabattis, Houlton Band of Maliseet: “This law is crucial to advancing the Houlton Band’s efforts to develop independent, long-term revenue sources that are not dependent on federal funding and will enable us to support and expand governmental services for Maliseet families and other community members. It is a result of collaboration between the Wabanaki Nations and state government under our unique jurisdictional relationship to create opportunities that will enable the Nations to share in the economic benefits of gaming.”
Chief McCormack, Mi’kmaq Nation: “Rural Maine and our Nations are interconnected. When Tribal economies grow, local businesses, workers, and towns grow too. The Mi’kmaq Nation is proud to stand in court with the other Wabanaki Nations to defend a law that makes that shared prosperity possible.”
Chief Bassett, Passamaquoddy Tribe (Pleasant Point): “The Wabanaki Nations face steeper barriers to prosperity than other Tribes around the country, and we have been historically blocked out of Maine’s casino gaming industry as our peers across Indian country rebuilt their economies and the economies around them using those same economic tools we were deprived of. Defending this law is defending our right to pursue self-determination. We are fighting for a brighter economic future for our future generations.”
Chief Nicholas, Passamaquoddy Tribe (Indian Township): “The Passamaquoddy Tribe has been steadfast in its support of economic sovereignty as its number one priority the past two years in the Maine legislature. We are ready to stand in court to defend a law we were proud to fight for over the past years in the state house. Maine’s new internet gaming law is intended to promote a better economic future for Wabanaki communities and for rural Maine. By protecting this law, we protect our future.”
Native American Rights Fund Staff Attorney Lenny Powell: “The Native American Rights Fund is proud to jointly represent the Wabanaki Nations in efforts to defend ‘An Act to Create Economic Opportunity for the Wabanaki Nations Through Internet Gaming.’ This attack represents an unfortunate effort to undermine Tribal-state partnerships. It seeks to undermine the legal basis for constructive government-to-government policy collaboration, despite decades of data showing that Tribal and non-Tribal communities alike are stronger when Tribal nations are empowered in their pursuit of self-determination.”
On April 1, 2026, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals threw out the Arizona Legislature’s challenge to Baaj Nwaavjo I’tah Kukveni-Ancestral Footprints of the Grand Canyon National Monument. The decision leaves the monument in place and fully protected. You can see the decision here:
In September of 2024, the District Court denied, without prejudice, the Tribes’ motion to intervene in this case, finding the United States adequately represented the Tribes’ interests at that time. Here is that order:
The Ninth Circuit’s April 1 decision affirms the District Court decision dismissing the two consolidated cases filed against the Monument designation.
The National Monument protects thousands of historic and scientific objects, sacred places, vital water sources, and the ancestral homelands of many Indigenous Peoples. Baaj Nwaavjo I’tah Kukveni lands include cultural and sacred places of the Havasupai Tribe, Hopi Tribe, Hualapai Tribe, Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians, Las Vegas Paiute Tribe, Moapa Band of Paiutes, Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah, Navajo Nation, San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe, Yavapai-Apache Nation, Pueblo of Zuni, and the Colorado River Indian Tribes. The Monument receives its name from the Indigenous names given to the area by the Havasupai and Hopi. Baaj nwaavjo (BAAHJ – NUH-WAAHV-JOH) means “where Indigenous peoples roam” in the Havasupai language, and i’tah kukveni (EE-TAH – KOOK-VENNY) means “our ancestral footprints” in the Hopi language.
Learn More: Arizona Legislature v. Biden
On March 3, 2026, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan granted the Tribal Nations’ motion to intervene in Torongo v. Burgum, the case that threatens the long-sought designation of the Chuckwalla National Monument.
In August 2025, five Tribal Nations — the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, the Fort Yuma Quechan Indian Tribe, the Chemeheuvi Indian Tribe, the Colorado River Indian Tribes, and the Morongo Band of Mission Indians — filed a motion to intervene to protect Chuckwalla’s national monument status.
Learn more about Tribal Nations’ advocacy for their homelands in the Chuckwalla region.
On December 15, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana approved a settlement reached in Chippewa Cree Indians of the Rocky Boy’s Reservation v. Chouteau County, Montana that will provide Tribal citizens the opportunity to elect a representative of their choice to the Chouteau County Board of County Commissioners.
Under the terms of the settlement, the Tribal Nation’s reservation will be part of Chouteau County’s District 1, which will elect a representative to the Board of County Commissioner through a single-member district election.
“We’re pleased that the county did the right thing in giving the Chippewa Cree Tribe a chance to elect a representative to the Board of Commissioners,” said Chippewa Cree Tribe Chairman Harlan Gopher Baker. “It has been more than a decade since we have had a Native voice in county politics. We look forward to being a part of this conversation.”
“This case was about our community finally having a representative and a voice like other voters in the county,” said plaintiff and voter Tanya Schmockel, a citizen of the Chippewa Cree Tribe. “I am excited about finally having the chance to have our voices heard and our concerns addressed.”
Most of Chouteau County’s Native population lives on or near the Rocky Boy’s Reservation, and many critical local issues — such as infrastructure, road maintenance, and emergency services — require coordination between the county and Tribal governments.
“In order for our county to include all of us, we needed a fair election system. With the new district, we have a chance for our voters to elect a commissioner who understands Native issues,” said plaintiff and voter Ken Morsette, a citizen of the Chippewa Cree Tribe. “This is a huge step forward for our Tribe.”
Native American Rights Fund (NARF), American Civil Liberties Union Foundation Voting Rights Project (ACLU), and ACLU of Montana (ACLU-MT), represent the plaintiffs in this case.
Read more about the Tribe’s successful fight for fair voting in Chouteau County.
On November 19, 2025, the Klamath Tribes filed a motion to amend their petition in the Circuit Court of Klamath County. The amended petition seeks to reverse recent illegal orders that replaced a long-time administrative law judge in the Klamath Basin Adjudication (KBA) on the heels of a secret deal cut between the Oregon State Office of Administrative Hearings and certain water users in the Upper Klamath Basin. Here is the amended petition:
The KBA is a several-decades-old lawsuit pending in the Circuit Court of Klamath County. It is quantifying the federal reserved water rights of the Klamath Tribes in the Klamath River Basin. The KBA involves administrative hearings conducted by the Office of Administrative Hearings, which made initial determinations on the Tribes’ water rights claims. Extensive proceedings were conducted at the Office from 2006 to 2012, and the Klamath County Circuit Court recently returned cases there for additional proceedings.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.