Author: Matthew L.M. Fletcher

WaPo: “Interior secretary: It’s ‘surprising’ Redskins name not changed, but it’s not top priority for tribal leaders”

I wondered when I learned that Tom Goldstein is co-counsel for the petitioners when this petition would end up as a SCOTUSblog “Petition of the Day.” As might be well known to TT readers, SCOTUSblog is the best daily source of news on the Supreme Court. But it is also (or was) a tool for Mr. Goldstein to drum up business. The blog recently make some headlines in its effort to acquire/obtain/earn a Supreme Court press credential, and was denied. Mr. Goldstein’s passionate and sophisticated response is well worth the read. As a question of journalism, I strongly support SCOTUSBlog’s efforts. It doesn’t bother me that SCOTUSblog-as-client development tool might somehow affect SCOTUSblog-as-journalist.

For what appears to be the first time, Mr. Goldstein is representing a Supreme Court petitioner against tribal interests, and so to the extent that it means anything at all, the tribal interests here are adversely affected by the SCOTUSblog-as-journalism outlet and SCOTUSBlog-as-Supreme Court advocate dynamic. There’s not enough information before me to make a conclusion as to whether that dynamic will affect the Court’s certiorari decision at the long conference here in a few weeks.

Here is a list of TT posts recognizing an Indian law “Petition to Watch” as identified by SCOTUSblog (grants are in red): Continue reading →

NARF Press Release: REDSKINS GROUP INFRINGES ON NARF TRADEMARK

September 5, 2014September 5, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher

REDSKINS GROUP INFRINGES ON NARF TRADEMARK

It has recently come to the attention of the Native American Rights Fund, also known as NARF, that a group variously calling itself “Native American Redskins Fans” and “Native American Redskins Family” is improperly holding itself out as “NARF,” in support of the continued use of the racially derogatory name used by the Washington D.C. National Football League franchise, and against which NARF has long battled.

This cynical use of NARF’s trademark has caused confusion both inside and outside of Indian Country, and NARF would like to set the record straight: NARF does not advocate, nor has it ever advocated, for the use of the name used by the Washington NFL football team.

For over twenty years, NARF has publicly denounced use of the name, supporting and participating directly in various legislative and litigation efforts to put an end to use of this offensive name. “Race-based stereotyping and behaviors in sports persist today,” said John Echohawk, NARF’s Executive Director, “including, in particular, the racially derogatory name of the ‘Washington Redskins’ professional football organization. NARF has long worked, and will continue to work, to put an end to this racial slur masquerading as a team name.”

Having been publicly known as NARF for over 40 years, NARF’s superior legal rights to use its name and trademarks (and to exclude others from doing so) cannot be questioned, and NARF will use all means available to protect its name from misappropriation by others. Legal counsel representing NARF have sent cease-and-desist letters demanding a halt to this infringement on a website misappropriating its “NARF” trademark, and reserving NARF’s rights to take legal action.

Founded in 1970, the Native American Rights Fund is the national Indian legal defense fund dedicated to asserting and defending the rights of Indian tribes, organizations and individuals nationwide. NARF’s legal advocacy is concentrated in five priority areas: the preservation of tribal existence; the protection of tribal natural resources; the promotion of Native American human rights; the accountability of governments to Native Americans; and the development of Indian law and educating the public about Indian rights, laws, and issues. See our website — http://www.narf.org.

IHS Director Hosts All Tribes Call TODAY

September 4, 2014September 16, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher

IHS Director Hosts All Tribes Call TODAY

Dr. Yvette Roubideaux, Acting Director for the Indian Health Service (IHS), will host a call to provide updates about Contract Support Costs today, Thursday, September 4, from 3:00PM – 4:00PM (EST). Please see the call in information below:

Date: September 4, 2014
Time: 3:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. (EST)
Phone: 1-877-709-5343
Passcode: 6248121

IHS sent a letter to Tribal leaders on Tuesday, September 2, 2014, providing a written update for Fiscal Year 2014 Contract Support Costs. You can review it here. [Update: IHS to Moran 08-29-2014 IHS Contract Support FY14 Reprogramming Package]

Note: This call is off the record and not for press purposes. Please dial in 5-10 minutes early to help avoid any delays in joining the call.

Continue reading →

ICRA Suit against Makah Tribe Dismissed by Federal Court

September 4, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Chamblin v. Greene (W.D. Wash.):

Procopio Firm Seeks 2015 Native American Law Summer Intern

September 4, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here.

Alaska Natives Win Major Voting Rights Case

September 4, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher3 Comments

Here is the press release:

Toyukak Press Release

We posted some materials from this case, Toyukak v. Treadwell (D. Alaska), here.

Tenth Circuit Finds Federal Question in Thlopthlocco Tribal Town v. Stidham, Orders Tribal Court Exhaustion

September 3, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here is the opinion in Thlopthlocco Tribal Town v. Stidham. An excerpt:

The Thlopthlocco Tribal Town is a federally recognized Indian tribe in Oklahoma. An election dispute arose about which individuals were properly elected or appointed to govern the Thlopthlocco people. Seeking to resolve that dispute, the Tribal Town filed suit in the tribal court of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation and, accordingly, voluntarily submitted to that court’s jurisdiction.

The Tribal Town subsequently concluded it did not want to maintain its suit in tribal court and dismissed its claims. But the defendant in that suit had, by that time, filed cross-claims. Arguing that the Tribal Town’s sovereign immunity waiver did not cover proceedings on the cross-claims, the Tribal Town attempted to escape Muscogee court jurisdiction, but, in various decisions, several judges and justices of the Muscogee courts held that they may exercise jurisdiction over the Tribal Town without its consent.

The Tribal Town then filed a federal action in the Northern District of Oklahoma against those Muscogee judicial officers, seeking to enjoin the Muscogee courts’ exercise of jurisdiction. The district court dismissed the case, finding that the federal courts lacked subject matter jurisdiction, the defendants were entitled to sovereign immunity, the Tribal Town had failed to join indispensable parties, and the Tribal Town had failed to exhaust its remedies in tribal court. We conclude, however, that the Tribal Town has presented a federal question and that the other claims do not require dismissal. But we agree the Tribal Town should exhaust its remedies in tribal court while its federal court action is abated.

Here are the briefs:

Thlopthlocco Opening Brief

Stidham Brief

Thlopthlocco Reply Brief

Lower court materials here.

Call for Papers – Indigenous Environmental Rights and Tribal Environmental Regulation

September 3, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher

William Mitchell Law Review, Vol. 41, Issue 2 (Spring 2015)

The William Mitchell Law Review is dedicating an issue to environmental justice issues, with a focus on indigenous rights to land and natural resources. The issue will be published in March 2015. Confirmed article topics so far cover tribal groundwater rights, EPA jurisdiction over off-reservation Indian lands, and mechanisms for tribal adaptation to climate change. The law review invites submissions that would support this overall theme of indigenous environmental justice and tribal environmental regulation.

Founded in 1974, the William Mitchell Law Review publishes timely articles of regional, national and international interest for legal practitioners, scholars, and lawmakers. Judges throughout the United States regularly cite the Law Review in their opinions. Academic journals, textbooks, and treatises frequently cite the Law Review as well. Due to the rising prominence of William Mitchell’s Indian law program, the Law Review is increasingly becoming a resource for articles relevant to Indian country.

Submissions may take the form of short commentaries or full-length law review articles. If you are interested in submitting an article, please email your submission to melissa.lorentz@wmitchell.edu by Friday, September 12th.