Author: Matthew L.M. Fletcher – Page 211

National Indian Law Library Bulletin (6/22/2018)

June 27, 2018Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

The National Indian Law Library added new content to the Indian Law Bulletins on 6/22/18.

U.S. Supreme Court Bulletin
http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/sct/2017-2018update.html
Read the latest Tribal Supreme Court Project update published on 6/20/18.

Law Review & Bar Journal Bulletin
http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/lawreviews/2018.html

Through a Federal Habeas Corpus glass, darkly- Who is entitled to effective assistance of counsel in tribal court under ICRA and how will we know if they got it?
Tribal sovereignty and the recognition power.
Twenty-five years later: The amendments to the National Historic Preservation Act and Tribal Consultation.
Foreign-Trade zones in Indian Country: Is a foreign-trade zone right for your tribe?
Silence is anything but golden: Laws of general applicability in Indian Country.
Alvarez v. Lopez: The Ninth Circuit overextends Congress’s intended use of plenary powers with its interpretation of the ICRA jury provision.
Lessons from relocations past: Climate change, tribes, and the need for pragmatism in community relocation planning.
Water exchanges: Arizona’s most recent innovation in Water Law and Policy.
Ensuring Arizona’s future today: The Lower Basin Drought Contingency Plan and its implementation in Arizona.
Overcoming constitutional obstacles to the resolution of general stream adjudications.
Retail Canyon: The failure of Environmental Law within an American treasure.
The ubiquitous ubiety of Native American Law.
An overview of practicing American Indian Criminal Law in Federal, State, and Tribal Courts, and an update about recent expansion of criminal jurisdiction over non-Indians.
Data sovereignty and the Tribal Law and Order Act.
The effect of state marijuana legalization on tribes: One tribe’s unexpected journey.
A former tribal leader’s thoughts on serving tribal clients.
NHPA 106 Consultation: A primer for tribal advocates.
Conquering injustice: An analysis of sexual violence in Indian Country and the Oliphant gap in tribal jurisdiction.
Patchak v. Zinke (16-498).
The National Historic Preservation Act: An inadequate attempt to protect the cultural and religious sites of Native nations.
Why try to change me now?: The basis for the 2016 Indian Child Welfare Act Regulations.
Highway culverts, salmon runs, and the Stevens Treaties: A century of litigating Pacific Northwest Tribal Fishing Rights.
Do borders make a difference behind bars? The scope of prisoners’ free exercise of religion protection in Canada and the United States.
A view from American courts: The year in Indian Law 2017.
Resources for relocation: In search of a coherent Federal policy on resettling climate-vulnerable communities.
Implementing the Federal Trust Responsibility to Indians after President Nixon’s 1970 message to Congress on Indian Affairs: Reminiscences of Reid Peyton Chambers.
The State, the Tribe, and the ugly: The Ninth Circuit stakes a bad claim on Indian Land for tribal civil jurisdiction over nonmembers in Window Rock Unified School District v. Reeves.

Federal Courts Bulletin
http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/federal/2018.html
Chinook Indian Nation v. Zinke (Federal Recognition)

State Courts Bulletin
http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/state/2018.html
In re C.A. (Indian Child Welfare Act – Application of)

News Bulletin
http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/news/currentnews.html
In the Land & Water section, we feature a couple of articles relating to an effort to nullify a tribal water rights settlement deal.

U.S. Legislation Bulletin
http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/legislation/115_uslegislation.html
The following bill was added:
H.R.6124: To amend Title II of the Social Security Act to authorize voluntary agreements for coverage of Indian tribal council members, and for other purposes.

Federal Court Declines to Suppress Statement Made by Habitual D.V. Defendant Represented by Tribal Lay Advocate

June 27, 2018June 26, 2018Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here are the materials in United States v. Freemont (D. Neb.):

45 motion to suppress

Grant Christensen on Predicting Supreme Court Behavior in Indian Law Cases

June 26, 2018Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Grant Christensen has posted his paper, “Predicting Supreme Court Behavior in Indian Law Cases,” on SSRN.

Here is the abstract:

Since 1959 the Supreme Court has heard an average of 2.6 Indian law cases each term out of a recent average of approximately 80 cases. This paper attempts to identify which factors may be influencing the outcome of Indian law opinions by creating a new dataset of 156 Indian law cases and testing twelve potentially explanatory variables using logistic regression analysis.

Unexpectedly, the paper concludes that Chief Justice may play a determinative role in Indian law opinions – exceeding the importance of the office in most other analysis of the Court. This is true even though the Chief Justice has changed four time over the course of the study, indicating that it is the office of Chief Justice, and not the individual holding the office, that has the observed effect.

Overall the logistic regression model was able to explain more than 70% of the variance in the outcome of Indian law opinions, indicating that the independent variables provided a robust survey of the problem. In addition to the role of the Chief Justice, other important variables when it comes to explaining the Supreme Court’s behavior on Indian law questions include whether the tribe was the appellant, whether the case was decided by a single vote, whether a jurisdictional dispute between a state and tribe was at the center of the controversy and whether the case arose from Alaska or Hawaii.