Here.
NPR: History of the Phrase “Don’t Be an Indian Giver”
Here.
Author: Matthew L.M. Fletcher
Lynn & Whyte: “Indigenous Peoples, Climate Change and the Government-to-Government Relationship”
Kathy Lynn and Kyle Powys Whyte have posted “Indigenous Peoples, Climate Change and the Government-to-Government Relationship” on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
Climate change impacts present indigenous peoples with distinct challenges, from the loss of species needed for subsistence practices like fishing and plant gathering, to coastal erosion that may force some communities to migrate away from areas they have inhabited or used for many years. Students, activists, environmental managers, scholars and corporate and political leaders of all heritages should be aware of how indigenous peoples must address climate change impacts from global to community-level scales, and the obstacles they may encounter due to intersecting oppressions, like cultural imperialism and disempowerment. To create such awareness, there is a need for more work that describes the specific sites of interaction relevant to indigenous peoples and climate change. Sites of interaction are the local and regional places where indigenous peoples are in relationships with governments, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), networks and alliances. Better understanding the relationships that indigenous peoples have with these groups and institutions contributes to fostering unique and necessary indigenous approaches to address climate change that reflect their unique cultural connections to the earth. This paper focuses on one of the critical sites of interaction for indigenous peoples in the United States — the government-to-government relationship. While the government-to-government relation is not a new approach, this paper examines how it might operate in indigenous climate change adaptation contexts in the United States. We describe a set of examples of consultation and collaboration and offer seven recommendations that demonstrate the value of tribal responses to climate change.
Tribal Immunity and IGRA’s Legislative History
Curious about the State of Michigan’s argument that Congress did not believe Indian tribes possessed immunity outside of Indian country when it enacted the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, I checked out the legislative history for support either way. Below are just the hearings to which I have access.
There is a fair amount of discussion about tribal immunities from state regulation and taxation, and most interestingly about whether tribal immunity cloaks nonmember gaming management companies and consultants.
I don’t see any discussion of off-reservation gaming at all, which the State suggests, I suppose, would be normal if Congress was assuming something about immunity one way or the other.
In any event, enjoy the legislative history.
June 25, 1987 hearing (PDF)
Nothing here, except in a newspaper article reference to an inter-tribal dispute between the Otoes and the Seminoles that couldn’t be settled in the courts “because sovereign immunity would prevent the tribes from successfully suing one another.” Page 184.
June 17, 1986 hearing (PDF)
Omaha Tribe opposes any provision that would waive tribal immunity; not specific as to language in a draft bill or elsewhere. Page 110. See also page 357.
DOJ testifies against Indian gaming referencing immunity from state regulation in Indian country. Page 143
Interior testimony quoting 1983 Mescalero Apache decision on “historic” tribal immunity from state regulation. Page 164.
Excerpt from federal district court decision on tribal immunity from state taxation, suggesting Congress assumes states have no “residual power” to tax tribes. Page 419.
State of Minnesota testimony requesting waiver of tribal immunity to enforce gaming “licenses” against tribes. Page 501.
State of Minnesota testimony requesting waiver of immunity to allow national commission to enforce fines on tribes. This appears to assume that an Indian tribe might be immune from federal regulation, too. Page 504. See also page 505.
Arizona AG arguing that nonmembers gaming in tribal casinos should not be cloaked in tribal immunity for purposes of state regulation. Page 598.
Jun. 25, Sep. 13, 1985 Hearings (PDF)
Arizona AG arguing against Indian gaming in Indian country “immune from State regulation”. Page 40.
Tulalip member testifying about case in which State of Washington unsuccessfully sued to stop tribal bingo. Page 163.
Kickingbird testimony on gaming contracts, advising against “general waiver of sovereign immunity.” Page 188.
Indian Country, USA waiver of immunity in general form contract. Page 202.
Fort McDowell bingo code, preserving immunity. Page 900.
Rincon Band management contract, with limited waiver of immunity. Page 1183.
Barona Band management contract, with limited waiver. Page 1235.
June 26, 1985 Hearing (PDF)
Sen. Domenici testimony, concern about nonmember employees claiming immunity. Page 22.
Arizona AG arguing against Indian gaming in Indian country “immune from State regulation”. Page 115 (same as June 25 testimony)
Morongo Band management contract, no waiver. Page 266.
Tulalip member testifying about case in which State of Washington unsuccessfully sued to stop tribal bingo. Page 284. (same as June 25 testimony)
Kickingbird testimony on gaming contracts, advising against “general waiver of sovereign immunity.” Page 295. (same as June 25 testimony)
Indian Country, USA waiver of immunity in general form contract. Page 309. (same as June 25)
June 18, 1987 Hearing (PDF)
Coos, Lower Umpqua & Suislaw Indians testimony against waiver of tribal immunity, referencing “discriminatory taxation legislation.” Page 496.
Nov. 14, 1985 Hearing (PDF)
Interior testimony quoting 1983 Mescalero Apache decision on “historic” tribal immunity from state regulation. Page 38.
June 19, 1984 Hearing (PDF)
Rep. Vento expressing concern about nonmember management contractors asserting immunity from state regulation. Page 44-45.
National Indian Gaming Task Force testimony on tribal immunity from suit by gaming management consultants. Page 80.
CRS Report, April 26, 1985 (PDF)
Nothing
Michigan Opening Brief in Michigan v. Bay Mills — Updated
NCAI Amicus Brief in Eleventh Circuit Fight over Native Prisoners and Long Hair
Here is the brief in Knight v. Thompson:
Knight – NCAI Amicus Brief on En Banc Final
News coverage here.
Grand River Enterprises Six Nations Cert Petition in Challenge to Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement
Here is the petition in Grand River Enterprises Six Nations Ltd. v. Oklahoma ex rel. Pruitt:
And the questions presented:
1. Whether this Court’s precedents establish that the State of Oklahoma (along with 45 other States and various U.S. territories with similar statutes) can impose escrow obligations on certain cigarette manufacturers based partly on sales by Indian tribes to tribal members in Indian country.
2. Whether the Oklahoma Escrow Statute, as interpreted by the state courts in this case, violates federal law by imposing escrow obligations on certain cigarette manufacturers — including Indian-owned businesses operating on reservation lands mbased partly on sales by Indian tribes to tribal members in Indian country.
Update:
Douglas Luckerman’s Attorney Fees Suit Remanded to Tribal Court
Here are the materials in Luckerman v. Narragansett Indian Tribe (D. R.I.):
8-1 Narragansett Motion to Dismiss
Prior post here.
Nottawaseppi Huron Band of Potawatomi Seeks Staff Attorney
Here:
POSITION SUMMARY
Under the direction of the Chief Legal Counsel and the Tribal Council, the Staff Attorney provides legal advice to the Tribal Council and various programs being operated under the authority of the Tribal Council. Represents the Nottawaseppi Huron Band of the Potawatomi in court actions in Tribal, State and Federal court proceedings. Reviews and prepares legal documents, advises client constituents within the Tribal government as to legal rights, and practices other phases of law by performing the following duties.
Here is the paper:
NYTs Profile of the Mohawk Lacrosse Pro Who Played the Original Tonto
Here.
Worth reading for the story about how he acquired the Silverheels nickname.
Native Nations Institute Announces Online Courses: “Rebuilding Native Nations”
August 8, 2013
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Native Nations Institute Launches Groundbreaking “Rebuilding Native Nations” Online Course Series
TUCSON, Arizona – Culminating a six-year development process, the Native Nations Institute (NNI) today announced the launch of its groundbreaking “Rebuilding Native Nations: Strategies for Governance and Development” distance-learning course series. Designed primarily for use by Native nations and tribal colleges and universities, the curriculum examines the critical governance and development challenges facing Native nations and surveys the breadth and diversity of Native nation-building efforts across Indian Country. Sharing lessons learned through 25 years of community-based research by NNI and its sister organization the Harvard Project on American Indian Economic Development, it explores what is working, what isn’t, and why as Native nations move aggressively to reclaim control over their own affairs and create vibrant futures of their own design.
“Rebuilding Native Nations presents and celebrates the great strides Native nations are making as they work to fully exercise their sovereignty and engage in true self-governance,” says Joan Timeche, NNI executive director. “It offers Native nations a chance to learn from one another, and for society at large to learn about the many positive things taking place across Indian Country.”
Featuring eight different course options, Rebuilding Native Nations provides a dynamic individual or group learning experience, weaving together video lectures by course instructors, video assignments featuring the perspectives of more than 125 Native leaders and scholars, curricular materials from NNI’s “Native Nation Building” and “Emerging Leaders” executive education seminars, in-depth case studies, illustrative graphics, the landmark Rebuilding Native Nations course textbook (Univ. of Arizona Press, 2007), and original readings drawn from the NNI-Harvard Project research.
“This curriculum provides Native nation leaders, employees, citizens and others a unique opportunity to learn about Native nation building directly from the horse’s mouth,” says Ian Record, the curriculum’s director. “It puts an exclamation point on what the NNI-Harvard Project research has found – that self-determination is the only policy that has ever worked for Native nations. The many governance success stories chronicled in the curriculum attest to that fact.”
Offered online, Rebuilding Native Nations also is available on DVD for those who live in rural areas with poor internet connectivity. Volume discounts are available to Native nations, organizations, and tribal colleges and universities that wish to enroll groups of participants in the courses. To learn more about Rebuilding Native Nations, please visit www.rebuildingnativenations.com or call 520-626-9839.
You must be logged in to post a comment.