Author: Matthew L.M. Fletcher

D.C. Circuit Orders Federal Exhaustion in Federal Acknowledgement Matter

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the order in Mdewakanton Sioux Indians of Minnesota v. Haaland:

CADC Memorandum Disposition

Briefs here.

Ninth Circuit Briefs in Apache Stronghold v. United States

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Apache Stronghold Opening Brief

NCAI Brief

Religious Liberty Groups Brief

Religious Liberty Law Scholars Brief

USDA Brief

US Answer Brief

Reply

Case tag here.

Sixth Circuit Decides Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians v. Whitmer

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

LTBB v Whitmer

Briefs here.

Oklahoma Criminal Appellate Court Reverses Chickasaw Reservation Conviction

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Bench v. State:

District Court Order

Petitioner Brief

State Brief

COA Opinions

Trespassers to Colville Lands Owe $1.4M in Back Rent

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Grondal v. United States (E.D. Wash.) after trial:

674 Plaintiffs Trial Brief

676 US Trial Brief

694 DCT Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

Prior post here.

Restatement of the Law of American Indians Is Approved

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here.

California COA Decides Stand Up for California! v. State of California

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

F069302A

An excerpt:

After deciding California law empowers the Governor to concur, the Supreme Court transferred this case back to us with directions to vacate our decision and reconsider the matter in light of United Auburn. We conclude the facts of this case are distinguishable from those in United Auburn because at the November 2014 general election California voters rejected the Legislature’s ratification of the tribal-state compact for gaming at the Madera site. As described below, we conclude the people retained the power to annul a concurrence by the Governor and the voters exercised this retained power at the 2014 election by impliedly revoking the concurrence for the Madera site. As a result, the concurrence is no longer valid, and the demurrer should have been overruled.

Federal Court Orders Tribal Exhaustion in Habeas Matter

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Loonsfoot v. Brogan (W.D. Mich.):

1 Complaint

5 DCt Order

Harvard Law Review Casenote on Williams v. Medley Opportunity Fund II [tribal payday lending]

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is “Williams v. Medley Opportunity Fund II, LP: Third Circuit Rules that Tribal Payday Lenders Cannot Compel Arbitration.”

We posted the materials on this case here.

Jamul Action Committee v. Simermeyer Cert Petition

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Jamul Pet2

Questions presented:

1. Whether, in 1994, Congress eliminated the distinction between “historic tribes” and “created tribes” and, thereby, eliminated the requirement that a tribe must have pre-existed the United States to have tribal immunity
2. Whether the JIV, which became a quarter-blood Indian group in 1996, is a federally recognized tribe, with tribal immunity, by virtue of the fact that it is still on the list of “Indian tribal entities” eligible to receive BIA services.

Lower court materials here.