AMERICAN INDIAN AND ALASKA NATIVE CHILDREN EXPOSED TO VIOLENCE TASK FORCE TO HOLD FIRST PUBLIC HEARING
Dec. 9 in Bismarck, N.D.
AMERICAN INDIAN AND ALASKA NATIVE CHILDREN EXPOSED TO VIOLENCE TASK FORCE TO HOLD FIRST PUBLIC HEARING
Dec. 9 in Bismarck, N.D.
Here.
Here.
Education Week just completed a special package on education in Indian Country. In addition to news stories from Pine Ridge and Morongo and a number of multimedia elements, they have also published Commentaries from four Native authors in collaboration with NIEA. They are illustrated by Brent Greenwood (Chickasaw/Ponca).
Here is the opinion in Evans v. Shoshone-Bannock Land Use Policy Commission. The court’s syllabus:
Reversing in the district court’s denial of a motion for preliminary injunction and dismissal of an action seeking to enjoin tribal court proceedings, the panel held that the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes lacked the power to regulate the land use of the plaintiff, a nonmember who owned land in fee simple within the Fort Hall Reservation.
The panel held that the plaintiff was not required to exhaust tribal remedies before bringing suit in federal court because the tribal court plainly lacked jurisdiction. The panel held that because the plaintiff was an owner of non-Indian fee land, the Tribes’ efforts to regulate him were presumptively invalid under Montana v. United States, 450 U.S. 544 (1981), and an exception for the regulation of nonmember activity that directly affects a tribe’s political integrity, economic security, health, or welfare did not apply. The panel reversed the judgment of the district court and remanded the case for further proceedings.
Briefs and lower court materials are here.
Time for another poll as we hit the end of the year — top ten Indian law cases of 2013. We’ll try the Condorcet route again. Poll ends Monday morning, the 9th.
Here are the ten (actually 11 because I can’t count….):
Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl (SCT)
Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community (CA6 & SCT)
U.S. v. Washington — Culverts Subproceeding (W.D. Wash. & CA9)
Chehalis Tribes v. Thurston County (CA9)
Akiachak Native Community v. Salazar (D.D.C.)
Federal Trade Commission v. AMG Services (D. Nev.)
Grand Canyon Skywalk Development LLC v. ‘Sa’ Nyu Wa Inc. (CA9)
United States v. Zepeda (CA9)
Mashantucket Pequot Tribe v. Town of Ledyard (CA2)
Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin v. Village of Hobart (CA7)
Sheffer v. Buffalo Run Casino (Okla. SCT)
Here are the various Tax Court petitions:
Here is the complaint in California Valley Miwok Tribe v. San Joaquin County Sheriff’s Office (E.D. Cal.):
Here are the materials in Alturas Indian Rancheria v. Salazar (E.D. Cal.):
129 Alturas Motion for Contempt
An excerpt:
This is a proceeding brought by plaintiff Indian tribe to determine whether the government is in contempt of the court’s January 13, 2012 order in this case (ECF No 126). Plaintiff asserts that the following portion of the court’s order required the government to pay “contract support costs” associated with the “self-determination” contracts it entered into with plaintiff:
The BIA has approved the Tribe’s selfdetermination contract requests for the fiscal years 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012, and shall transfer the amounts provided in those requests to the Tribe’s bank account … in accordance with the terms contained in the contract award documents.Order of January 13, 2012, ECF No. 126 ¶ 2 (“Settlement Agreement and Stipulation for Entry of Judgment and Order”).
For the reasons that follow, plaintiff’s request to enforce the judgment or for a contempt order will be denied.
Our prior post on this case includes materials on the court’s original denial of the government’s motion to dismiss.
You must be logged in to post a comment.