B.J. Jones & Christopher Ironroad on Sentencing Disparities for Dakota Citizens

Here:

89 N.D. L. Rev. 53
Addressing Sentencing Disparities for Tribal Citizens in the Dakotas: A Tribal Sovereignty Approach
– BJ Jones & Christopher J. Ironroad

The abstract:

Native Americans in the Dakotas can receive criminal sentences in federal courts that are harsher than sentences meted out for similar conduct in state courts. The reason for this is the historical role the federal government has played in determining justice issues in tribal communities. Although the federal government oftentimes sought tribal input into justice issues in tribal communities, that input has not been sought in the area of sentencing of natives for offenses in federal courts, with some limited exceptions (death penalty and career offender sentencing). This Article argues a need to change this practice and that Indian tribes, through an opt-in provision similar to other tribal opt-in provisions in the criminal justice arena, should have a right to dictate more equitable sentencing for their members when the sentencing disparity is stark and exists only because federal jurisdiction lies. Such a remedy to disparate sentencing would not impact the prosecution of crime in tribal communities, but instead would ensure that native persons do not receive more punitive sentences merely because of their status as American Indians. Because of the unique trust relationship between the United States and American Indian tribes, the United States has a legal and moral imperative to address this issue, similar in regards to the disparity in federal sentences for crack versus powder cocaine offenses, which had a disproportionate impact upon African-Americans. In particular, this Article examines the sentencing of a young native woman on the Fort Berthold reservation who was prosecuted for the death of an infant child and sentenced in accordance with federal guidelines that appear to be far out of proportion to similar sentences in state courts. This Article suggests that a remedy for prior sentences be considered by Congress in light of the hesitancy of the executive branch to utilize its clemency powers to correct Native American sentencing injustices.

Gregory Gagnon on Chthonic Law in American Indian Law

Here:

89 N.D. L. Rev. 29
American Indian Law: A Discourse on Chthonic Law
– Gregory Gagnon

The abstract:

This discourse on Chthonic Law, a theory propounded by H. Patrick Glenn among others, is the occasion for describing advantages and disadvantages of the introduction of customary American Indian law (Chthonic law) into the courtroom. Remarks on the theory, considerations of its merits and weaknesses and illustrations from American Indian societies lead to the conclusion that Chthonic law should become part of the admissible evidence in American courts. A major criticism of Chthonic Law theory is that it tends to describe a fictionalized version of society. Examples of American Indian violence, use of punishment, and private property law counter the idyllic construction of Chthonic law. Examples of the actual operation of a different legal system do exist, particularly the use of compensation and the justice goal of restoration after offenses. Chthonic law theory, if modified can be of use to American Indian plaintiffs.

Fletcher: “Bullshit and the Tribal Client”

I’ll be presenting aspects of a draft paper, “Bullshit and the Tribal Client,” at Federal Indian Bar next week. Here is the abstract:

While it is well established that lawyers may not lie to their clients, it is not well established whether counsel can bullshit their potential and active clients. I do not mean bullshit as a term of abuse, but rather as philosopher Harry Frankfurt meant it. Frankfurt identified politicians and public relations professionals as examples of modern day bullshitters. Politicians and PR professionals care only about reaching their goals, and while that may include telling lies, it definitely includes making statements that no one can possibly know is true or not. All that matters is the outcome. Lawyers are bullshitters, too. And lawyers utilize bullshit for the same reason politicians do – to persuade someone to select them. Politicians want a vote; lawyers want a client. In American Indian law and policy, lawyers are not the only bullshitters – elected tribal officials are politicians, too, and many of them are bullshitters as well.

While there is a lot of bullshit going around, I am mostly (but not entirely) concerned about bullshit from outside counsel, often specialized counsel, directed at tribal clients. This paper is intended to identify areas where counsel employs bullshit when dealing with tribal clients. By counsel I mean both outside counsel and in-house counsel, and by clients I include both in-house counsel and tribal leadership. The relationship between in-house counsel and most, if not quite all, tribal government clients renders tribal clients uniquely vulnerable to bullshit by outside counsel. I offer suggestions, mostly for the benefit of in-house counsel, on how to deal with bullshit from both outside counsel and tribal officials. However, I will be the first to acknowledge that in-house may be placed in a no-win scenario, especially once appellate specialists take control of a case involving tribal interests.

Substantive comments welcome.

On another note, I recommend learning more about and perhaps joining the Tribal In-House Counsel Association.

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Moves against Three Tribal Payday Lenders UPDATED

Here are the materials in Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Great Plains Lending LLC, Mobiloans LLC, and Plain Green LLC (C.D. Cal.):

1 CFPB CID Enforcement Petition

2 CFPB 3-19-14 Memo

3 CFPB Declaration

6 CFPB Show Cause Order

UPDATE:

14 Respondents Joint Opposition

22 CFPB Reply

25 Respondents Joint Surreply

28 DCT Order

Climate Survey – State, Local and Tribal Task Force on Climate Change

Climate Resilience and Preparedness Task Force
Tribal Leaders: Chairwoman Karen Diver and Mayor Reggie Joule
Survey for Recommendations

Background

The President’s Climate Preparedness and Resilience Task Force (Task Force) was convened to develop recommendations on how the Federal government can better support local, state and tribal governments in achieving resilience through Disaster Preparedness, Built Systems, Natural Systems and Agriculture, and Community Development and Health.

The Task Force is charged with providing actionable strategies that can be implemented through existing agency authorities which: 1) remove barriers and create incentives and otherwise encourage investments in resilience; 2) provide useful tools and information, including through intergovernmental coordination; and 3) otherwise support state, local and tribal preparedness for resilience to climate change.

Request for Input
The two tribal leaders on the Climate Change Task Force, Chairwoman Karen Diver of the Fond Du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa and Mayor Reggie Joule of Alaska’s Northwest Arctic Borough, are soliciting your input in developing recommendations specific to:
1. disaster recovery and resilience,
2. infrastructure,
3. natural resources and agriculture, and
4. human health and community development.

Please consider contributing to this process with a brief response to the questions presented below and send your response to IndianCountry@who.eop.gov by Tuesday, April 15, 2014.

Consider a challenge you have encountered or an opportunity you have identified relating to climate preparedness planning and efforts to build resilience within one of the 4 topics listed above.

Continue reading →

Federal Court Rules against Native Hawaiians Prisoners in Religious Freedom Case

Here are some relevant materials in Davis v. Abercrombie (D. Haw.):

439-1 Huy Amicus Curiae Brief

462 Order Granting Huy’s Motion For Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief

497 Order on Summary Judgment

N. Arapaho Tribe Fights Draft Federal Legislation to Terminate the Wind River Reservation

Here is the press release:

NEWS RELEASE

“Considerations for Climate Change and Variability Adaptation on the Navajo Nation”

Julie Nania & Karen Cozzetto have published “Considerations for Climate Change and Variability Adaptation on the Navajo Nation,” a report coming out of the Getches-Wilkinson Center at CU Law.

The report pdf is here.

Nooksack Disenrollments under Resolution 13-111 Enjoined

Here:

Roberts v Kelly Order Permanently Enjoining Disenrollment Proceedings

COA materials here.

Final Wash. Dept. of Revenue Tax Advisory on Permanent Improvements on Tribal Trust Land

Here:

FAQs – Improvements on Trust Land

PTA Improvements on Tribal Trust Land Final

Interim guidance was here.