Author: Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Idaho SCT Affirms Jurisdiction over Native Wholesale Supply

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the opinion.

The court’s summary:

In an appeal from Ada County, the Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the district court that the State of Idaho can regulate the importation of cigarettes onto reservations located in Idaho and that the State has personal jurisdiction over non-resident defendant Native Wholesale Supply Company. The Supreme Court reversed the district court’s decision that Native Wholesale Supply Company is required to obtain a wholesaler permit for its sales to a tribal-owned retailer on the Coeur d’Alene reservation.

News coverage here.

Puyallup Judicial and Prosecutor Job Postings

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here’s the Associate Judge posting:

The Puyallup Tribe of Indians is soliciting applications for employment of an Associate Judge for the Puyallup Tribal Court. This is a full-time, Tribal Council appointed, position for an initial term of three years.

As an Associate Judge at the Puyallup Tribal Court, the judge will provide a full range of judicial services by hearing cases in the trial court regarding, but not limited to such issues as, criminal, civil, fishing, hunting, youth dependency, traffic, housing, gaming, and employment.

The statutory prerequisites for employment are: 1) must be a member of a federally recognized Indian tribe; 2) must be over the age of 28 years old; 3) must hold a Juris Doctorate degree and membership to a state bar; and 4) never have been convicted of an offense involving dishonesty or moral turpitude.

Salary for the Associate Judge position is based upon years of service as a judge with the Puyallup Tribe.  Current starting annual salary is $138,673.  In addition to salary, the Puyallup Tribe provides a very generous employee benefits package that includes medical/vision, dental, life insurance and retirement/ 401(k) plan.

Applications and a detailed job description are available at www.puyallup-tribe.com.   Applications and inquiries regarding the Associate Judge position may be submitted or directed to Mr. Tim Reynon, HR Executive Director, Puyallup Tribe of Indians, Human Resources Department, 3009 E. Portland Ave., Tacoma, WA 98404; telephone: 253-573-7866; or by email to tim.reynon@puyalluptribe.com.

The Puyallup Tribe is an urban, Pacific Northwest tribe located on southern end of the Puget Sound near the city of Tacoma, Washington.

And the assistant prosecutor/Indian child welfare presenting officer posting:

The Puyallup Tribe of Indians is soliciting applications for employment of an Assistant Prosecutor/ICW Presenting Officer for the Prosecutor’s Office. This is a full-time, position for an initial term of one year.

The Assistant Prosecutor/ICW Presenting Officer represents the Puyallup Tribe in the enforcement of the Criminal, Juvenile Justice and/or Children’s Codes in Tribal Court proceedings. This position performs the duties of the Assistant Prosecutor/Juvenile/ICW Presenting Officer as assigned by the Senior Prosecutor.

Continue reading →

Slate Publishes 1830 Petition Protesting Indian Removal Act

Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here for details.

And here for the petition:

PetitionFinal.jpg.CROP.article920-large

Miccosukee Sues United States, Claiming Illegal Tax Audits and Trust Breach

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the complaint in Miccosukee Tribe v. United States (S.D. Fla.):

Miccosukee Complaint

Here is an excerpt:

1. The MICCOSUKEE TRIBE brings this suit to redress intentional and gross breaches of trust by the United States, by and through the Defendants, with respect to the money and property of the MICCOSUKEE TRIBE and its People.

2. This suit involves willful, purposeful, and malicious actions by the United States, by and through the Defendants, by selectively targeting the MICCOSUKEE TRIBE and its People for federal tax audits.
3. The procedures utilized to target the MICCOSUKEE TRIBE and its People were improper, secret, and conflict ridden.
4. These procedures were conflict ridden and improper because they involved dealings with persons acting outside the established scope of employment with the MICCOSUKEE TRIBE and whose legal interests were clearly and substantially adverse to the legal interests of the MICCOSUKEE TRIBE and its People.
5. Although the United States, acting by and through the Defendants, clearly knew that the individuals they were dealing with were acting to the detriment of the MICCOSUKEE TRIBE and its People, it allowed, encouraged, perpetrated, and protected them in order to improperly obtain tax assessments, penalties, and interest against the MICCOSUKEE TRIBE and its People amounting to millions of dollars.
6. Although the United States, acting by and through the Defendants, clearly knew that some of the individuals they were dealing with were actively engaged in violation of the criminal laws of the United States while purporting to represent the interests of the MICCOSUKEE TRIBE, the United States allowed, encouraged, perpetrated, and protected these individuals in order to improperly obtain tax assessments, penalties, and interest against the MICCOSUKEE TRIBE and its People amounting to millions of dollars.
7. These losses to the MICCOSUKEE TRIBE and its People are permanent and of a continuing nature, as interest continues to accrue on the tax assessments instituted by the United States, acting by and through the Defendants.

8. As a direct and proximate cause of the intentional and wrongful actions, as well as the gross breach of trust by the United States, acting by and through the Defendants, the MICCOSUKEE TRIBE and its People have suffered irreparable harm by losing millions of dollars through the Defendants’ arbitrary and indiscriminate imposition of tax liabilities, penalties and interest.

New Student Scholarship on the Tribal Law and Order Act

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Seth J. Fortin has published “The Two-Tiered Program of the Tribal Law and Order Act” (PDF) in the UCLA Law Review Discourse.

Here is the abstract:

The Tribal Law and Order Act of 2010 was intended to significantly expand the sentencing powers of tribal courts, raising the maximum sentence for a given offense from one year to three. But the Act requires courts that would take advantage of these new powers to provide significant procedural protections to criminal defendants, while failing to provide the funding most tribal courts would need to make those protections a reality. Moreover, the Act leaves vague and open to interpretation the precise form those protections should take, which is an open invitation to federal courts to scrutinize tribal court procedure; this, in turn, may put tribal courts in the position of choosing between longer sentences and retaining their traditional character. These two obstacles—lack of funding, and the danger to tribal courts’ unique character— mean that the Act is likely to sort tribes into two “tiers”: wealthier or more assimilated tribes will be able to take advantage of the longer sentences, while tribes that cannot afford (whether financially or culturally) to change their practices will be left unable to adequately sentence serious offenders. And because of the way the Act resolves a longstanding ambiguity in Indian law, some tribes in the latter group may be left with less sentencing power than they had previously.

Ninth Circuit Materials in Native Village of Point Hope v. EPA

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Native Village of Point Hope Opening Brief

EPA Brief

NANA Regional Corporation Answer Brief

Native Village of Point Hope Reply Brief

Oral argument audio here.

EPA’s statement of the issue:

Whether EPA’s approval of Alaska’s site-specific water quality criterion for total dissolved solids (“TDS”) in the Main Stem of Red Dog Creek during Arctic grayling spawning season was arbitrary or capricious where EPA based its approval on a comprehensive review of existing scientific evidence and, consistent with a recent study’s recommendation, an additional study into the impacts of TDS exposure on fertilization success in Arctic grayling.

New Paper on the Availability of Tribal Law

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Bonnie J. Shucha posted her paper, “Whatever Tribal Precedent There May Be’: The (Un)Availability of Tribal Law” on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

This article explores the costs and benefits of publishing tribal law. Part I analyzes why tribal law is not more widely available; part II illustrates the benefits of making tribal law more accessible, and part III describes publication options for tribes. An appendix lists currently available tribal law collections.

New York ex rel. Schneiderman v. Western Sky Materials

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

NY Petition

NY Memorandum of Law

Exhibits

News coverage.

WSJ on New York’s Suit against Indian Country Payday Lenders

Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here. Excerpt:

Courts have long upheld that tribal-owned businesses enjoy the same sovereign immunity as tribal governments and aren’t subject to state law. Matthew Fletcher, director of Michigan State University’s Indigenous Law and Policy Center, said the ownership structure of a firm has bearing on its legal defenses in such situations. Lenders owned by an individual member of a tribe but not deemed to be owned by the tribe itself would have less ground in attempting to block lawsuits or other state action, he said.

“I would assume the tribe and the tribal entity would respond by saying you don’t have jurisdiction over the tribal nation,” Mr. Fletcher said.