Nazune Menka on Alaska Tribal Sovereignty

Nazune Menka has published “The Corpus Juris of (Alaska Native) Inherent Tribal Sovereignty” in the Alaska Law Review.

Highly recommended!

Here is the abstract:

The inherent Tribal sovereignty of Native nations predates the formation of the United States and is reflected in the constitutional vision of tripartite sovereignty. Yet their sovereignty is oft diminished explicitly by federal law or implicitly by federal courts. This implicit divestiture is often the result of the federal judiciary’s inconsistent interpretations of Indigenous Peoples law. This Article argues that a more principled and coherent approach for federal judges would be to consistently make use of the corpus juris, or whole body of law, including the in pari materia or affiliated statutes canon. The Article posits that the corpus juris of inherent Tribal sovereignty requires understanding whether any federal laws have explicitly abrogated or diminished a specific Native nation’s rights to traditional self-governance and understanding traditional Tribal law. The corpus juris inherent Tribal sovereignty approach illustrates how, where the Supreme Court has utilized the in pari materia canon, the consistency and coherence of Indigenous Peoples law increases. Through an analysis of select cases, involving Native nation traditional land and ways of life, I illustrate how Alaska Native nations have been particularly impacted by the explicit and implicit diminishment of traditional ways of life. However, through traditionally informed governance systems, Alaska Native nations continue to assert their inherent Tribal sovereignty, especially when faced with Alaska’s “sole state sovereignty” arguments in federal courts. The Article utilizes the corpus juris of inherent Tribal sovereignty argument and the constitutional vision of tripartite sovereignty to illustrate how the State of Alaska’s “sole state sovereignty” arguments must fail when utilizing this more coherent approach.

SCOTUS Denies Cert in Michigan Treaty Rights and Alaska Subsistence Rights Challenges

Here is the order list.

Case tag for Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians v. Michigan is here.

Case tag for Alaska v. United States is here.

Alaska Native Suit Challenging Arctic Oil Drilling

Here is the complaint in Sovereign Iñupiat for a Living Arctic v. Burgum (D. Alaska):

Complaint

Briefs in Opposition to Alaska’s Effort to Once Again Open Up the Alaska Native Subsistence Rights Litigation

Here are the new briefs in Alaska v. United States:

Federal BIO

Tribal BIO

Cert petition here.

OMG this is ridiculous.

Alaska Federal Court Declines to Dismiss Metlakatla Fishing Rights Case under Rule 19

Here are new materials in Metlakatla Indian Community v. Dunleavy (D. Alaska):

Prior post here.

Alaska v. United States Cert Petition [Alaska Native fishing subsistence rights]

Here:

Question presented:

Whether the United States can regulate fishing on Alaska’s navigable waters under the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, when its statutory authority is limited to “public lands” and that term is defined as “lands, waters, and interests therein … the title to which is in the United States.”

Lower court materials here.

Ninth Circuit Reaffirms Katie John Trilogy and Affirms Injunction against State of Alaska

Here is the opinion in United States v. State of Alaska:

Briefs here.

Alaska SCT Affirms Grant of Full Faith and Credit to Native Village of Tanana Court Order under ICWA

Here is the unpublished opinion in Jethro A. v. Native Village of Tanana:

NARF’s Work in Alaska Over 40 Years

The Native American Rights Fund has provided legal assistance to Tribes in Alaska since NARF’s founding in the early 1970s. In 1984, NARF opened an Alaska office so it could better serve Alaska Native Tribes and individuals. In the 40 years since NARF Alaska opened its doors, the office has litigated some of the most influential cases in the development of federal Indian law in Alaska. Below is an overview of the foundational work that NARF has done with and on behalf of Alaska Native Tribal governments and people.

Alaska Federal Court Rejects Effort to Attack Alaska Tribal Nations’ Federal Acknowledgment + Sovereign Immunity [Eklutna Gaming Operations]

Here are the materials in Holl v. Avery (D. Alaska):

7 Amended Complaint

13 Tribe Motion to Dismiss

26 Opposition

29 Federal Response

33 Reply ISO 13

35 DCT Order