Kirsten Carlson’s “Priceless Property”

Kirsten Matoy Carlson recently published “Priceless Property” in the Georgia State Law Review.

Here is the abstract:

In 2011, the poorest American Indians in the United States refused to accept over one billion dollars from the United States government. They reiterated their long-held belief that money–even $ 1.3 billion–could not compensate them for the taking of their beloved Black Hills. A closer look at the formation of the Sioux claim to the Black Hills helps us to understand why the Sioux Nation has repeatedly rejected compensation for land taken by the United States over 100 years ago. This article seeks to understand why the Sioux view the Black Hills as priceless property by studying the formation of the Black Hills claim. It constructs a new, richer approach to understanding dispute formation by combining narrative analysis with the sociolegal framework for explaining dispute formation. The article argues that narratives enrich the naming, claiming, and blaming stages of dispute creation. It illustrates the usefulness of this new approach through a case study of the Black Hills claim. It uses the autobiographical work of an ordinary Sioux woman to provide a narrative lens to the creation of the Sioux claim to the Black Hills. American Indian Stories by Zitkala-Sa presents a narrative of Sioux life around the time of the claim’s emergence. By contextualizing and humanizing the claim, my analysis provides insights into why the Sioux claim to the Black Hills emerged into a legal dispute and helps to explain why the Black Hills remain priceless property to the Sioux Nation today. The article concludes with a suggestion for successful resolution of the Black Hills claim based on acceptance of the Black Hills as priceless property to the Sioux Nation.

20131023-070414.jpg

Opening Brief in Lomeli v. Kelly — Nooksack Disenrollment Appeal

Here:

Lomeli v Kelly Opening Brief of Appellants

 

Call for Papers: 2014 Native American Literature Symposium

15th NATIVE AMERICAN LITERATURE SYMPOSIUM

March 27-29, 2014

Mystic Lake Casino Hotel

Minneapolis, MN

MANY VOICES, ONE CENTER

Call for Proposals

DEADLINE: November 25, 2013

With literature as a crossroads where many forms of knowledge meet—art, history, politics, science, religion, film, cultural studies—we welcome once again spirited participation on all aspects of Native American studies. We invite proposals for individual papers, panel discussions, readings, exhibits, demonstrations, and workshops.  We especially encourage presentations and panels on teaching children’s and young adult literature by indigenous writers.

Scheduled speakers include Eric Gansworth who just published a young adult novel, If I Ever Get Out of Here, and First Nations Manitoba writers Duncan Mercredi, Katherena Vermette, and Rosanna Deerchild whose work appears in Manitowapow.

Continue reading →

FBA’s 15th Annual D.C. Indian Law Conference Agenda

Here:

8:00-9:00a Registration
8:30-8:45a Welcome & Prayer
8:45-9:45a Tribal Same Sex Marriage Laws:
Several Tribes have passed laws authorizing or banning ame sex marriage. How does the Supreme Court’s ecent Windsor decision impact these Tribal same sex arriage laws and what is its potential impact on Federal ndian law/programs?
9:45-10:00a Coffee Break
10:00-11:00a Payday Lending:
Recently several Tribal payday lending business have been sued by individuals and states for lending practices that violate state laws. Does the  operation of these Tribal payday lending businesses put Tribal sovereign immunity at risk?
11:00a-12:00p IGRA at 25 and a Discussion of the Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community Supreme Court case:
The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act is twenty-five  years old and Tribal gaming has undoubtedly benefited many tribes. However, several recent lawsuits by states against Tribal gaming operations and the individual officers of the Tribes have allowed states to test the boundaries of civil enforcement actions and sovereign immunity. Will these attempts to do an endrun around Tribal sovereign immunity by suing the individual officers of the tribes make IGRA’s enforcement mechanisms irrelevant?
12:00-1:30p Lunch Keynote:
Despite partisan gridlock in the current Congress, Senator Cantwell successfully fought to keep  the new Tribal provisions in the reauthorized Violence Against Women Act that give Tribes jurisdiction over nonIndian perpetrators of domestic violence. She continues to be an Indian Country ally.
1:30-2:30p Taxation in Indian country:
What impact do the recent taxation cases in the Ninth and Second Circuits and Interior’s new leasing regulations have on the ability of a state or local government to impose a taxes on improvements to Tribal land or to impose taxes on non-Indian vendors that lease property to a Tribe?
2:30-3:45p Revisiting the NLRB’s San Manuel Decision:
Three cases challenging the National Labor Relations Board assertion of jurisdiction over Tribal casinos are currently being briefed in the courts of appeal. In all three cases the Tribes are challenging the NLRB’s assertion of jurisdiction over the tribe and arguing that NLRB’s 2004 San Manuel decision was wrongly decided. Will the San Manuel decision be overturned?
3:45-4:00p Soda Break
4:00-5:00p Ethics CLE Who is your client?
The Tribe, the Tribal Chairman, the Tribal Council, the individual Tribal Officers, the Tribal Gaming Commission? With the rise of Santa Clara Pueblo type lawsuits against Tribal Officers in their individual capacity, who is your client, what are your responsibilities? How should lawyers responsibly advise the Tribe?

Nooksack Court Orders Tribe to Allow Legal Representation in Disenrollment Proceedings … by 800 number … in 10 minute hearings

Here are the newest materials in Roberts v. Kelly (Nooksack Tribal Court):

Roberts v Kelly Order Granting Defendant’s [Sic] Motion to Dismiss

Roberts v. Kelly Second Motion for Temporary Restraining Order

And an order in the Lomeli v. Kelly matter from the appellate court:

Lomeli v Kelly Order Accepting Appeal of September 24 2013 Order

News coverage here.

Nevada Legal Services Indian Law Project Job Posting

THE INDIAN LAW PROJECT OF NEVADA LEGAL SERVICES has an opening for a staff attorney position. A demonstrated interest in Federal Indian Law or tribal law matters strongly preferred. The attorney will be based out of the Reno office but will work in tribal courts across the state in both civil and criminal cases. Licensure in any state preferred; the attorney may practice in Nevada under Supreme Court Rule 72.1.  The attorney will also appear in state court on jurisdictional matters and assist in providing general counsel to a number of Nevada tribes. Travel required. $41,032+ DOE, Equal Opportunity Employer. Please send a cover letter, resume, and a writing sample to:
Roberta O’Hara, rohara@nlslaw.net

Update in Wells Fargo v. Chukchansi — Payments Not Being Made; Referree Appointed

Here are updated materials in Wells Fargo Bank N.A. v. Chukchansi Economic Development Authority (N.Y. Sup.):

298 Affidavit in Support of Order to Show Cause

299 Exhibit A

300 Exhibit B

301 Exhibit C

302 Exhibit D

303 Exhibit E

304 Ayala Faction Response

305 Affidavit in Support of Order to Show Cause

306 Exhibit A

307 Exhibit B

308 Exhibit C

309 Exhibit D

317 Wells Fargo Letter re Interest Payment

318 Amended Order

319 Order

News coverage here.

Prior post here.

Federal Court Dismisses Effort to Enforce Multi-Million Dollar Tribal Court Judgment for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction

Here are the materials in Brenner v. Bendigo (D. S.D.):

1-1 CRST Court Order

8 Bendigo Motion to Dismiss

9 Brenner Brief

10 Bendigo Response Brief

11 DCT Order

An excerpt:

This is an original garnishment action brought in federal court pursuant to a state statute to enforce a tribal court judgment. Doc. 6. An action for a writ of garnishment filed in federal district court as an independent action does not arise under federal law; it arises under state law. See Berry v. McLemore, 795 F.2d 452, 456 (5th Cir. 1986) (“First, subject matter jurisdiction as defined in 28 U.S.C. § 1331, does not exist, because an action for a writ ofgarnishment arises from state law, not federal law. “). Even when taking all the facts pleaded in the Affidavit as true, this action does not arise under federal law and federal question jurisdiction is not proper.

 

Seventh Circuit Holds Oneida Owes No Stormwater Fees to Village of Hobart

Here are the materials in Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin v. Village of Hobart:

CA7 Opinion

Village of Hobart Brief

Oneida Brief

United States Brief

Village of Hobart Reply

An excerpt from Judge Posner’s opinion:

Nevertheless we can imagine an argument, built on our earlier example of the Village’s authority to deploy its firefighters on Indian parcels, for an exception of necessity—a common law graft onto the Clean Water Act—to the Oneida tribe’s exclusive authority over Indian land. But the Village doesn’t argue for such an exception; it doesn’t deny the feasibility of cooperative arrangements between it and the tribe, which has signed cooperative service agreements with other government bodies in the area.

So Hobart loses its case against the tribe. And there is another reason it must lose. Because federal law forbids states and local authorities to tax Indian lands, the tribe can’t be forced to pay the assessment decreed by the challenged ordinance if the assessment is a tax.

Lower court materials here.

News Update on Nooksack Disenrollments

Here.

Materials to be posted later.

20131019-102901.jpg