Author: Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Fourth Circuit Rejects Western Sky-Related Claims

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Dillon v. BMO Harris Bank:

Opinion

Opening Brief

Response Brief

Reply Brief

Lower court materials here.

 

The Guardian: “Dakota Access pipeline has first leak before pipeline is fully operational”

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here.

Idaho SCT Briefs in Coeur d’Alene Tribe v. Johnson — Tribal Court Judgment Enforcement

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Appellant Brief

Response Brief

Reply Brief

Update on Bears Ears Listening Sessions: In Short, It’s Going As Expected

Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here:

Interior Secretary Orders Protester To ‘Be Nice’ During Visit To Bears Ears: 

Ryan Zinke shook his finger in the face of a woman urging him to meet with tribal leaders.

Gila River Sues Gravel Company for Trespass

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the complaint in Gila River Indian Community v. Skousen Family Gravel Operations LLC (D. Ariz.):

Doc 1 – Complaint

Federal Court Denies Yet Another Effort by CashCall/Western Sky to Force Tribal Arbitration

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in MacDonald v. CashCall (D.N.J.):

11-1 Motion to Compel Arbitration

16 Opposition

20 Reply

24 Opinion

Tribal Appellate Court Affirms Immunity Defense in Comanche Gaming Dispute

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the opinion in CDST-Gaming v. Comanche Nation (Ct. Indian Appeals):

CDST Gaming v. Comanche Nation

Lower court decision here.

Related posts here, here, and here.

Upright Citizens Brigade Cert Petition Challenging Indian Rights

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Say it isn’t so Amy Poehler!UCB2

Actually, the petition is captioned Upstate Citizens for Equality v. United States:

Cert Petition

Questions presented:

1. Can Congress in the exercise of its Article 1 powers infringe, reduce or diminish the territorial integrity of a State without its prior consent?
2. Does Congress possess plenary power over Indian affairs and if so does it expand the Indian Commerce Clause to authorize the displacement of State rights to territorial integrity?
3. Does the land acquisition in this case via the mechanism of 25 USC § 465 (now 25 USC § 5108), represent a violation of the limits inherently expressed in the Indian Commerce Clause that limit Congress’ power to ‘regulate’ ‘commerce?’
4. Does the 300,000-acre ancient Oneida Indian reservation in New York still exist?

Lower court materials here.

Update (7/7/17)– the adults have entered the room — here is the federal government’s cert opp brief:

Cert Opp

 

Dakota Gaming Patron’s Privacy Act Complaint Dismissed

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here are the materials in Block v. Dakota Nation Gaming Commission (D.S.D.):

1 Complaint

5 Motion to Dismiss

9 DCT Order