Here:
Hollingsworth v. Perry — affirming lower court decision striking down Cal. Prop. 8
United States v. Windsor — striking down DOMA
Author: Matthew L.M. Fletcher
Impact of SCT’s Voting Rights Act on Indian Country
The potential implications of Shelby County may be massive for Indian voting. I’m no expert, but eyeballing the covered jurisdictions (or should I say formerly covered jurisdictions), I see a lot of Indian country.
I see Alaska and Arizona, but thousands upon thousands of Indian voters potentially affected. I see Shannon and Todd Counties in South Dakota. Obviously Lakota territory. I even see Allegan County in Michigan, where the Gun Lake Tribe is located. [Wrong township.] There’s Robeson County in North Carolina where the Lumbees are, and Kings County in California.
Could Justice Breyer’s Concurrence Help Save Baby Veronica?
Take a look at Justice Breyer’s concurrence. Last paragraph:
Third, other statutory provisions not now before us may nonetheless prove relevant in cases of this kind. Section 1915(a) grants an adoptive “preference” to “(1) a member of the child’s extended family; (2) other members of the Indian child’s tribe; or (3) other Indian families . . . . in the absence of good cause to the contrary.” Further, §1915(c) allows the “Indian child’s tribe” to “establish a different order of preference by resolution.” Could these provisions allow an absentee father to re-enter the special statutory order of preference with support from the tribe, and subject to a court’s consideration of “good cause?” I raise, but do not here try to answer, the question.
Presumably, the litigation will continue on remand to the South Carolina courts below.
IPR Coverage of Supreme Court Grant in Michigan v. Bay Mills
Here.
Draft 25 CFR Part 83 Regs (Office of Federal Acknowledgment)
Here:
Quick Comments:
This revision strikes me as a response in some ways to the Carcieri decision. The first obvious change is that tribal groups need only to prove existence (for lack of a better word so early in the morning) dating back to 1934 instead of 1900. As a result, some of the substantive criteria has been changed due to the date change, and perhaps even liberalized to the benefit of petitioning groups.
Finally, there appears to be some changes allowing for expedited decisions favoring tribes previously recognized in some contexts, perhaps ala Tejon.
Cobell Order on Distribution to Deceased Class Members
Here:
News Coverage of Michigan v. Bay Mills Grant
Here.
Quoting Fletcher:
The case is narrowly focused on the state’s ability to sue under the tribal-state compact — not the merits of the casino question itself, said Matthew Fletcher, director of the Indigenous Law and Policy Center at Michigan State University.
News Coverage of Chukchansi Till Tap Decision
Here.
Here’s my take:
The best course of action, said Michigan State University law professor Matthew Fletcher, who monitors legal issues in Indian country, is to wait until the … government settles the tribe’s leadership dispute.
“It just seems to me there is no rush on this judgment,” Fletcher said. “Just wait until this is all over — that would be my advice if I was the sheriff’s attorney.”
Bay Mills Press Release on Supreme Court Decision to Hear Casino Case
Statement by the Bay Mills Indian Community regarding today’s decision by the U.S. Supreme Court
Please attribute the following statement to Bay Mills Indian Community
Tribal Chairman Kurt Perron
The U.S. Supreme Court decides to review Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals Case
The Bay Mills Indian Community is deeply concerned by the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to review this case as it is in any case where it appears the Court may examine the doctrine of tribal sovereign immunity. We remain confident that the nation’s highest Court will agree with our position.
Q: What is next?
A: The Tribe will be preparing its arguments to convince the Court of the correctness of the decision by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.
BACKGROUND
Michigan Indian Land Claims Settlement Act
The Bay Mills Indian Community received funds from the Michigan Indian Land Claims Settlement Act of 1997 and purchased property in Vanderbilt. Any land purchased with the land claim money becomes a tribal reserve and thus can be the site of a tribal casino.
Bay Mills Indian Community
The Bay Mills Indian Community is a federally recognized Indian tribe with a reservation in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula. In 1993, the Tribe entered a Tribal-State compact with the State of Michigan, pursuant to the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. Bay Mills operates two casinos on its reservation in Chippewa County, Michigan.
###
RAND Report on Sole-Source 8(a) Native American Contracts
Here.
The description:
Some participants in the federal 8(a) Business Development Program, including Alaska Native Corporations, Indian tribes, and Native Hawaiian Organizations, face no limit on the value of sole-source contracts they can receive. Concerns over the rising number of these contracts led to requirements for justification and approval of contracts above $20 million. This raised other concerns regarding the effects of the new requirements on Native American-owned firms and contracting personnel. The new federal requirement may delay the award of these contracts but have little impact on the number of such contracts awarded.
You must be logged in to post a comment.