Author: Sarah Donnelly – Page 36

Most disturbing is the court’s disregard of the racial inequity left in the wake of Bryant. Federal prosecutors are now licensed to target Indians – and only Indians – who faced prosecution without assistance of counsel in tribal court proceedings. This is because ICRA allows tribal courts to imprison Indians without the benefit of counsel but does not impact non-Indians, who are entitled to court-appointed counsel in state, federal, and now tribal court, thanks to a recent amendment to ICRA.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who wrote Bryant, denigrates Indian people’s civil rights, citing the need to protect Native women from domestic violence. But Department of Justice statistics show most domestic violence perpetrators in Indian country are non-Indians, and the Bryant decision leaves intact their constitutional rights, including the right to appointed counsel.

D. Wyoming Finds BLM Fracking Regulations Unlawful

June 27, 2016Sarah M Donnelly

Here are materials in Wyoming v. U.S. Dept. of Interior, et al, 15-cv-00043 (Jun. 21, 2016):

Doc. 176 – Brief in Support of Wyoming, Colorado, and Utah’s Petition for Review of Final Agency Action

Doc. 180 – Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation Merits Brief

Doc. 191 – Respondents’ Merits Brief in Response to the Ute Tribe of The Uintah and Ouray Reservation’s Merits Brief

Doc. 193 – Federal Respondents’ Brief in Response to Merits Briefs of Industry and State Petitioners

Doc. 197 – Reply in Support of Wyoming, Colorado, and Utah’s Petition for Review of Final Agency Action

Doc. 199 – Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation’s Reply in Support of its Merits Brief

Doc. 207 – Order on Petitions for Review of Final Agency Action

The DOI and respondents have filed a leave to appeal.

Link to previous coverage here.

Call for Papers: American Indian Law Review

June 27, 2016Sarah M Donnelly1 Comment

The American Indian Law Review (AILR) welcomes articles by legal scholars and practitioners in the areas of law relating to Native Americans and indigenous peoples. The American Indian Law Review serves as a nationwide scholarly forum for analysis of developments in legal issues pertaining to Native Americans and indigenous peoples worldwide, and is one of the most cited legal publications in the nation.

Adhering to the traditional law review format, the Review offers in-depth articles by legal scholars, attorneys and other expert observers. The American Indian Law Review is committed to advancing the quality of published scholarship relating to Native Americans and other indigenous peoples. Toward this goal, the Review considers article submissions through an independent, double-blind peer-review process. Publication decisions are based upon objective recommendations from reviewers as well as the student board of editors.

Electronic submissions may be sent in one of two ways: (1) via ExpressO, an electronic submission service operated by the Berkeley Electronic Press, or (2) directly by email to the Review via mwaters@ou.edu. Submissions should follow these guidelines:

Submissions may be in Microsoft Word or PDF format.
The cover letter or transmitting email should specify that the submission is intended for the American Indian Law Review. (Submissions for other OU Law journals are received in both ExpressO and email venues.)
Both the article being submitted and the cover letter should include the title of the article.
The article itself should be anonymous. The author’s name or affiliation should not appear anywhere in the article unless as a citation which is not clearly identified with the author.
The article should use footnotes, not endnotes, for citations. AILR recommends that submitters follow The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation(20th edition, 2015) for format and The Chicago Manual of Style for grammatical structure.

Hardcopy submissions may be submitted to:

American Indian Law Review
Andrew M. Coats Hall
300 Timberdell Road
Norman, OK 73019

The American Indian Law Review also recruits scholars and experts in the field of Native American law and indigenous peoples’ issues to review articles submitted to the Review for publication. Anyone interested in joining the Review’s pool of reviewers should contact Naomi Palosaari, Articles Development Editor, at naomi.palosaari@ou.edu.

Questions and inquiries may be sent to Austin R. Vance, Editor-In-Chief, at austin.vance@ou.edu.

Cert Petition in Trust Accounting Claim for Sand Creek Descendants

June 27, 2016Sarah M Donnelly1 Comment

Download petition for a Writ of Certiorari here.

Questions presented:

Whether a treaty promise to pay reparations to a group of Native Americans in the form and amount that is “best adapted to the respected wants and conditions of” said group of Native Americans, and subsequent appropriation of funds by Congress to pay such reparations, create a fiduciary relationship between the United States and said group of Native Americans.

Whether the Administrative Procedures Act waives the United States’ immunity from suit for accounting claims regarding trust mismanagement that begun before the enactment of the Act.

Whether a set of Appropriations Acts by Congress that defer the accrual of trust mismanagement claims against the United States operates as a waiver of the United States’ immunity from suit.

Previous posts in re Flute v. U.S. here.