Author: Matthew L.M. Fletcher
New York Racial Profiling Case Involving Mohawk Indian and Marijuana
Here.
The opinion in People v. Deer is here (it’s from March). An excerpt:
The court believes that Officer Carrier decided to follow the white SUV and do a radio run because the driver appeared nervous. Her actions were completely consistent with a person who was not engaged in any criminal activity. There was no basis to believe that a vehicle with a NYS license plate and registration had crossed the border or was engaged in any way with smuggling persons or contraband across the border. He drove up behind the SUV, coming close enough on a dark night in a rural area to see her license. As he overtook her or followed her, she swerved, a not unexpected result of having someone come up quickly, not pass and start to follow you. The radio run advised him that the person who owned and registered the vehicle lived at an address on or near the Mohawk reservation and had a name that might be consistent with a person of Mohawk heritage. It could, of course, also be a husband’s name and not her own. The officer then drove into Gouverneur, not for the purpose of stopping the vehicle immediately, but to further observe it, according to his testimony. He placed himself in a position to see into the vehicle with street lights, parking lot lights and his headlights. He had the opportunity at that point to observe Corene Deer with her clearly Native American features. He then stopped the vehicle. He was handed the registration sticker which should have been on the windshield. He wrote his report without even mentioning it, clearly indicating to the court that it was in no way the basis for his stop. Although he testified about observing that the sticker was not on a windshield at a point in his narrative of events that might have led the court to believe he observed it prior to the stop, his testimony on cross examination made it clear that he did not observe it prior to the stop, nor was it the basis for the stop.
Spirit Lake Employee Group’s Contract Claims against Feds Dismissed
Here are the materials in Council for Tribal Employment Rights v. United States (Fed. Cl.):
1-Council for Tribal Employment Rights Complaint
48-Council Motion for Partial Summary J
DCT Order Dismissing Complaint
An excerpt:
Council for Tribal Employment Rights (“Council”), a national intertribal nonprofit organization which represents the employment interests of certain Indian tribes, seeks $500,000 in damages for the alleged breach of two agreements which involved the Council, the Office of Indian Energy and Economic Development (“the Office”), a component of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (“the Bureau”), U.S. Department of the Interior, and the Spirit Lake Tribe (“Spirit Lake” or “the Tribe”), a federally recognized Indian tribe. Both agreements were executed as amendments to an existing contract between the Office and Spirit Lake. The first, Amendment 2, involved the provision of funds to support a Native Construction Careers Initiative (“NCCI”) commercial construction training program, and called upon the Council to conduct the training program. The second, Amendment 6, allocated funds to support training projects approved by the Federal Highway Administration (“FHWA”). The statement of work for that Amendment referenced an FHWA training program agreement which contemplated that the Council would provide training to develop certain certification programs for road construction activities.
Federal Court Dismisses Challenge to Paskenta Band Governance
Here are the materials in Swearinger v. Paskenta Band of Nomlaki Indians Tribal Business Council (N.D. Cal.):
DCT Order Dismissing Complaint
Paskenta Band Motion to Dismiss
An excerpt:
Plaintiffs are “enrolled members of the Paskenta Band of Nomlaki Indians,” a federally recognized Indian tribe with “approximately 240 members.” Docket No. 1, Compl. ¶¶ 11, 13-14. Although Congress revoked PBNI’s status as a federally recognized tribe in 1958, it later restored the tribe’s federally recognized status in 1994 by enacting the Paskenta Band Restoration Act (PBRA), Pub. L. No. 103-454, §§ 301-03, 108 Stat. 4791 (codified as amended at 25 U.S.C. §§ 1300m et seq.). Compl. ¶ 21. The PBRA directed the Secretary of the Interior to conduct an “election for the purpose of adopting a constitution and bylaws for the Tribe.” 25 U.S.C. § 1300m-6. The PBRA further states that, after the tribe adopts a constitution, “such tribal constitution shall govern membership in the Tribe.” Id. § 1300m-4(b).
News Coverage of Michigan Gaming Compact Negotiations
Here, courtesy of one of our senior Canadian correspondents.
Here’s the State of Michigan’s map of Michigan Indian casinos in case you feel like supporting tribal economic development:
Nooksack COA Stays Enrollments
Here are the materials in Lomeli v. Kelly (Nooksack Ct. App.) and Roberts v. Kelly (Nooksack COA):
Roberts v Kelly Order on Motion for Permission to File Interloctory Appeal
Thurston County Files En Banc Petition in Ninth Circuit Appeal
Kiowa Casino Operating Authority Reinstated as Defendant After Discovery Confirms Waiver of Immunity
Here are the new materials in Swanda Brothers Inc v. Chasco Constructors Ltd LLP (W.D. Okla.):
Kiowa Casino Operations Authority MTD
The court had previously dismissed Kiowa from the matter (see post here), but after discovery the parties found evidence of a waiver of immunity.

You must be logged in to post a comment.