Author: Peter Vicaire
First Nations University of Canada – Vice President, Academics – Job Opportunity
VICE-PRESIDENT, ACADEMICS
Clayton v. Lower Nicola Indian Band: Former Chief May Be Liable For $100,000 Indemnification & Damages
On his last day as Chief, and acting on behalf of the band, Don Moses agreed to settle a wrongful dismissal and defamation suit brought against the Lower Nicola Indian Band (LNIB) by Veronica Clayton, a former employee. However, the council was sharply divided and when Moses convened a meeting to pass a resolution to settle with Clayton, five (of seven) councillors did not attend. Moses then unilaterally reduced the required quorum from five to three. The case is here.
Fort Erie (Ontario) Qualifiedly Approves Subdivision Expansion Into 5 Pre-Contact Aboriginal Archaelogical Sites
Fort Erie, Ontario, has recently approved a subdivision expansion into land that contains 5 recognized pre-contact archaeological sites. However, that approval is contingent upon 47 requirements, of which #36 is…
Cameron v. Albrich: Inherent Aboriginal Sovereignty Or In[co]herent Aboriginal Sovereignty?
In Cameron v. Albrich, Ray Cameron, of the Ashcroft Indian Band, contested in the British Columbia Supreme Court, the band membership of 74 individuals (of a 250 member band). He claimed that they had not been properly added to the band list. The Chief, Greg Blain, was one of those 74 defendants. Ultimately the judge dismissed the action, with costs, holding that Cameron did not have standing.
Apart from one plaintiff contesting the membership of nearly a third of his band, this case is also interesting because it serves as an illuminating contrast to Indian law in the United States.
Fletcher & Vicaire: “Indian Wars: Old and New”
Matthew Fletcher and Peter Vicaire have posted “Indian Wars: Old and New” on SSRN (download here). This is a paper prepared for the Journal of Gender, Race, and Justice’s 15th Anniversary symposium, “War On … The Fallout of Declaring War on Social Issues.”
Here is the abstract:
This short paper analyzes American history from the modern “wars” on poverty, drugs, and terror from the perspective of American Indians and Indian tribes. These domestic “wars” are aptly named (it turns out), as the United States often blindly pursues broad policy goals without input from tribal interests, and without consideration to the impacts on Indians and tribes. With the possible exception of the “war on poverty,” these domestic wars sweep aside tribal rights, rights that are frequently in conflict with the overarching federal policy goals.
This essay explores three declared domestic wars, and their impacts on American Indian tribes and individual Indians, in loose chronological order, starting with the war on poverty. As Part 1 demonstrates, the Johnson Administration’s Great Society programs helped to bring American Indian policy out of the dark ages of the era of termination, in which Congress had declared that national policy would be to terminate the trust relationship. Part 2 describes the war on drugs, declared by the Reagan Administration, which had unusually stark impacts on reservation communities both in terms of law enforcement, but also on American Indian religious freedom. Part 3 examines the ongoing war on terror, which Bush Administration officials opined has its legal justification grounded in part on the Indian wars of the 19th century. The war on terror marks America’s return to fighting a new Indian war, where the adversary is illusive and motivated, and where the rule of law is literally obliterated.
Record Set For Number of Aboriginal Members of Canadian Parliament In Recent Election
The 7 aboriginal MPs (out of a total of 308 MPs in Parliament) include 3 newly elected and 4 re-elects. Party wise, there are 5 Conservatives (huh?) and 2 NDPs.
Wikileaks: U.S. Considers “Native Canadian Groups” As Possible Terror Threats
Here’s the story, as reported by APTN.
A few years ago, so did Canada.
Bordeau Santore (Estate) v. Bordeau: This Land Is Your Land, This Land Is My Land. From Kahnawake Reserve, To The New York Island
For an interesting look at the effects that s. 12(1)(b) of the Indian Act (women lost Indian status after marrying non-Indian) is still having on aboriginals in Canada, even after being repealed in 1985, here’s Bordeau Santore (Estate) v. Bordeau.
Supreme Court of Canada Grants Leave To Appeal To Manitoba Métis Federation
This should be interesting (at least for those so inclined Canadians) to watch down the road. The Manitoba Métis Federation is appealing a Manitoba Court of Appeal decision handed down on July 7, 2010. Below is an excerpt from that decision. And here is the leave to appeal. (note: this leave to appeal is dated February 10, 2011 and unfortunately slipped through, unnoticed, until now).
You must be logged in to post a comment.