Criminal

Supreme Court Denies Cert in Shavanaux

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

As expected, given the denial in Cavanaugh. Here is today’s order (Shavanaux is on page 4).

Here is our post on this question — how (and whether) federal courts may use uncounseled tribal court convictions for sentencing purposes. The cert petitions are here. OSG doesn’t publish cert opps for unpaid petitions, so if anyone has them, please send along.

NYTs Coverage of the Politics of the VAWA Reauthorization

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here. An excerpt or two:

Democrats, confident they have the political upper hand with women, insist that Republican opposition falls into a larger picture of insensitivity toward women that has progressed from abortion fights to contraception to preventive health care coverage — and now to domestic violence.

“I am furious,” said Senator Maria Cantwell, Democrat of Washington. “We’re mad, and we’re tired of it.”

And:

The legislation would continue existing grant programs to local law enforcement and battered women shelters, but would expand efforts to reach Indian tribes and rural areas. It would increase the availability of free legal assistance to victims of domestic violence, extend the definition of violence against women to include stalking, and provide training for civil and criminal court personnel to deal with families with a history of violence. It would also allow more battered illegal immigrants to claim temporary visas, and would include same-sex couples in programs for domestic violence.

 

New Mexico State Police Officer Arrested by Laguna Tribal Police

Adrea Korthase

Story and video on KOB News here.

Update on VAWA Reauthorization & Tribal Jurisdiction — Crunch Time

Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments
Here is  some of the latest information on Congress’ efforts to Reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA).  The VAWA Reauthorization, S. 1925, includes provisions that would restore tribal jurisdiction over non-Indians for purposes of domestic and dating violence.  S. 1925 currently has 58 co-sponsors, including all 51 Ds, 2 Independents, and Republican Senators Crapo, Kirk, Murkowski, Collins, and Scott Brown.  Senator Reid has indicated that he will bring the bill to the floor with 60 co-sponsors. Timing wise, it looks like mid-April, if there are 60.  
As we noted on Turtle Talk in early February, Senator Grassley voiced his opposition to the tribal jurisdictional provisions.  With S. 1925 close to Senate floor consideration, a small group of Republicans are pressuring Rs on the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs and those Rs that have co-sponsored the bill–including Senators Crapo, Murkowski, Hoeven, Johanns, McCain, and Barrasso–to oppose the tribal provisions.  Specifically, they are working to strip the tribal jurisdiction provisions in Sections 904 and 905 before permitting the bill to move forward.
We are told this group is attempting to racialize the issue, by attacking the credibility of tribal courts, lack of protections to non-Indian suspects of abuse, and the suspected non-Indian abusers’ voting rights in tribal elections.  Several other arguments are being raised, including: Congress doesn’t have the authority (despite Lara); flooding federal courts with habeas petitions; among others.
This group of senate offices are working behind the scenes. Now is the time for tribal attorneys, judges, and others to push to bring this historic legislation to the Senate floor, and to reach final passage in the Senate with the tribal provisions (Title IX) fully intact.

NYT/AP Coverage of Tribal Advocacy in Favor of the SAVE Native Women Act

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here.

Indian Law and Order Commission Agendas and Materials for This Week’s Meetings in DC

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

ILOC BusMtg_WashDC_030712_Agenda

ILOC FH_ExecSess_WashDC_030612_Agenda

ILOC BusMtg_WashDC_030712_Agenda

ILOC FH_WashDC_030712_Agenda

ILOC FH_WashDC_030812_Agenda

ILOC FH_WashDC_KAI Travel and Reimbursement Letter_Comm

Participant Travel Expense Claim Form

State of Washington Legislature Considers Retrocession Bill

Adrea Korthase

AP Story in the Seattle Times

Selected Legal Docs in Custer Battlefield Museum/Christopher Kortlander Controversy

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Interesting series of cases about a litigious dude (news coverage):

DCT Order Unsealing Case

Search Warrant Application

Kortlander v BLM FOIA Order

Kortlander v US Complaint

US Motion to Dismiss Kortlander Complaint

Federal Court Order re: Restitution for Killing of Navajo Members

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opinion in United States v. Harwood (D. N.M.):

DCT Sentencing Order in Harwood

In short, the court disallowed restitution for the costs of Navajo healing ceremonies because they were not “funeral or related services” under the Victim and Witness Protection Act of 1982.

Extra-Territorial Application of Tribal Criminal Law

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

An interesting question, especially given 17 NAVAJO CODE § 203, which reads:

The Navajo Nation Courts shall have jurisdiction over any person who commits an offense by his or her own conduct if the conduct constituting any element of the offense or a result of such conduct occurs within the territorial jurisdiction of the Navajo Nation Courts as defined in 7 N.N.C. § 254, or such other dependent Indian communities as may hereafter be determined to be under the jurisdiction of the Navajo Nation and the Courts of the Navajo Nation. The Navajo Nation Courts shall also have jurisdiction over any member of the Navajo Nation who commits an offense against any other member of the Navajo Nation wherever the conduct which constitutes the offense occurs.

For more detail on the extra-territorial application of federal criminal law as a possible analog, see this report from the Congressional Research Service.