Here:
cultural resources
Indian Peaks Band Files to Protect Tribal Water Rights
On April 1, 2026, the Indian Peaks Band of the Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah filed a Notice of Appeal and Petition for Stay with the Interior Board of Land Appeals (IBLA), challenging the Bureau of Land Management’s March 2, 2026, approval of the Pine Valley Water Supply Project.
The filing seeks review of BLM’s decision authorizing a large‑scale groundwater extraction and pipeline project in southern Utah and asks the IBLA to stay the project approvals while the appeal is pending. The Band argues that the decision violates federal law, including the National Environmental Policy Act, and unlawfully threatens the Band’s federally reserved water rights and culturally significant resources.
You can see more here.
Trevor Reed on NAGPRA
Trevor Reed has posted “The Intangible NAGPRA,” forthcoming in the Maryland Law Review, on SSRN.
Here is the abstract:
Following a 2023 regulatory update, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (“NAGPRA”) of 1990, which recognizes Tribal Nations’ ownership interests in their ancestors and artifacts, now expressly includes a controversial public display right that has shuttered museum displays across the country. Though functionally similar to widely criticized provisions of Italian cultural heritage law, I argue that the new regulations are justifiable given the unique status of Tribal Nations in U.S. constitutional law and Congress’s intent to negotiate a remedy for long-standing human rights abuses. Indeed, the Intangible NAGPRA is precisely what Tribal representatives on the Congressionally mandated year-long Panel for a National Dialogue on Museum/Native American Relations believed they were working toward in the lead-up to NAGPRA’s passage. Thus, this paper encourages the continued exercise of Indigenous peoples’ rights to protect their ancestors, belongings, sacred and cultural materials and the corresponding intellectual property rights that pertain to them.
Protections continue for Baaj Nwaavjo I’tah Kukveni – Ancestral Footprints of the Grand Canyon National Monument
On April 1, 2026, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals threw out the Arizona Legislature’s challenge to Baaj Nwaavjo I’tah Kukveni-Ancestral Footprints of the Grand Canyon National Monument. The decision leaves the monument in place and fully protected. You can see the decision here:
In September of 2024, the District Court denied, without prejudice, the Tribes’ motion to intervene in this case, finding the United States adequately represented the Tribes’ interests at that time. Here is that order:
2024-9-9 DOC 72 Order denying Motions to Intervene Tribal Nations, and Conservation Intervenors, granting State intervenors 4887-3571-0947 v.1Download
The Ninth Circuit’s April 1 decision affirms the District Court decision dismissing the two consolidated cases filed against the Monument designation.
The National Monument protects thousands of historic and scientific objects, sacred places, vital water sources, and the ancestral homelands of many Indigenous Peoples. Baaj Nwaavjo I’tah Kukveni lands include cultural and sacred places of the Havasupai Tribe, Hopi Tribe, Hualapai Tribe, Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians, Las Vegas Paiute Tribe, Moapa Band of Paiutes, Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah, Navajo Nation, San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe, Yavapai-Apache Nation, Pueblo of Zuni, and the Colorado River Indian Tribes. The Monument receives its name from the Indigenous names given to the area by the Havasupai and Hopi. Baaj nwaavjo (BAAHJ – NUH-WAAHV-JOH) means “where Indigenous peoples roam” in the Havasupai language, and i’tah kukveni (EE-TAH – KOOK-VENNY) means “our ancestral footprints” in the Hopi language.
Learn More: Arizona Legislature v. Biden
MSU ILPC Conference — Treaty Waters at Risk: Tribal Sovereignty and the Line 5 Challenge in the Great Lakes — April 17, 2026
Join us at MSU Law for Treaty Waters at Risk: Tribal Sovereignty and the Line 5 Challenge in the Great Lakes, a one-day conference on Friday, April 17, 2026, examining the legal and environmental stakes of energy infrastructure in treaty-protected waters.
Featuring a keynote by Whitney Gravelle, MSU Law and ILPC alumna and President of the Bay Mills Indian Community, the program brings together leading voices to discuss treaty rights, co-management, and the ongoing Line 5 conflicts at Bad River and the Straits of Mackinac.
Native America Calling Show on Line 5 TODAY
Here:
Tribes in Michigan oppose Enbridge the Line 5 oil pipeline replacement plan, arguing the environmental risks to their traditional waters far outweigh any benefits. The proposal to replace the 70-year-old pipeline that currently runs through Michigan and Wisconsin has faced many legal challenges over the years. Now, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether the state or federal government should have say over how the project proceeds. The decision could set a precedent on how much power tribes and states have in regulating fossil fuel development. We’ll speak with tribal leaders, Native legal scholars, and others about what’s next for the ongoing Line 5 pipeline legal battle.
GUESTS
Wenona Singel (Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa), associate professor of law at Michigan State University College of Law and associate director of the Indigenous Law and Policy Center
Elizabeth Arbuckle (Bad River), chairwoman of the Bad River Tribe
Melissa Kay, Tribal Water Institute fellow at the Native American Rights Fund
SCOTUS Emergency Petition Materials in Oak Flat Land Transfer Stay Request
Here are the materials in Lopez v. United States:
Ninth Circuit Rejects Effort to Force Injunction Against Transfer of Oak Flat to Mining Company
Here is the lead opinion in Arizona Mining Reform Coalition v. United States Forest Service. A partial dissent is forthcoming.
Selected briefs are here.
Tribal Nations Granted Intervention to Protect Chuckwalla Homelands
On March 3, 2026, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan granted the Tribal Nations’ motion to intervene in Torongo v. Burgum, the case that threatens the long-sought designation of the Chuckwalla National Monument.
In August 2025, five Tribal Nations — the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, the Fort Yuma Quechan Indian Tribe, the Chemeheuvi Indian Tribe, the Colorado River Indian Tribes, and the Morongo Band of Mission Indians — filed a motion to intervene to protect Chuckwalla’s national monument status.
Learn more about Tribal Nations’ advocacy for their homelands in the Chuckwalla region.
Berry Creek Rancheria Sues California to Enjoin Application of OSHA
Here is the complaint in Berry Creek Rancheria of Maidu Indians of California v. Lowry (E.D. Cal.):
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.