cultural resources

Seattle Law School: “Indigenous Perspectives on AI: Appropriation, Regulation, and Innovation” on June 5, 2026

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here.

Join Seattle University School of Law for the 9th Annual Innovation and Technology Law Conference, a virtual gathering exploring Indigenous Perspectives on AI: Appropriation, Regulation, and Innovation.

 

  • Friday, June 5, 2026
  • 9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
  • Virtual event
  • Register to receive the Zoom link the day before the event

 

Presented by the Technology, Innovation Law, and Ethics (TILE) Institute and the SITIE Initiative, and co-sponsored by the Northwest Center for Indigenous Law, Seattle Journal of Technology, Environmental & Innovation Law (SJTEIL), and the American Indian Law Journal, this year’s conference brings together leading scholars, practitioners, and Indigenous leaders.

 

Through a full day of panels and discussion, you’ll gain insight into:

 

  • The legal and ethical implications of cultural appropriation in AI
  • Indigenous data sovereignty and emerging frameworks
  • AI regulation through the lens of tribal sovereignty
  • Innovative models led by Indigenous technologists and communities

 

View the full agenda and speaker lineup on the SITIE Conference event page.
Register now to be part of this timely and critical conversation.

Agenda

Continue reading →

D.C. Circuit Rejects Narragansett’s Challenge to Federal Highway Admin. Decisions

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opinion in Narragansett Indian Tribe v. McMaster.

Briefs here.

Grand River Band Chairman Ron Yob Speaking at the Michigan Tribal-State-Federal Judicial Forum

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Lummi Tribe Sues Telephone Company over Destruction of Ancestral Burial Plots

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials so far in Lummi Tribe v. Whidbey Telephone Co. (W.D. Wash.):

1_Complaint.pdfDownload
12_Motion for PI.pdfDownload
12-2_LenaTsoDecl.pdfDownload
12-3_RobertWhitlamDecl.pdfDownload

From the tribe:

The Lummi Nation filed a federal lawsuit against Whidbey Telecom, Whatcom County, and the U.S. Departments of Agriculture and Commerce alleging a multi-year pattern of federally funded broadband construction that repeatedly trenched through known ancestral burial grounds at Point Roberts, disturbing and destroying human remains while flouting mandatory tribal consultation and stop-work obligations under federal law. Ten days later, the Nation filed an emergency motion for a preliminary injunction supported by sworn declarations revealing that defendants assessed less than one percent of the construction area, that hundreds of ancestors’ remains may have been harmed by heavy equipment, and that the county admitted in writing to improperly issuing permits — seeking a court order to halt construction and compel full site access for recovery and reburial.

Amended Complaint in Apache Stronghold v. United States

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

184 Amended Complaint.pdfDownload
We all need friends.

Indian Peaks Band Files to Protect Tribal Water Rights

Matthew Campbell

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

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

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

Matthew Campbell

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:

2026-04-01 25-1370 Memorandum – 9th Cir USCADownload

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

Matthew L.M. Fletcher
Photo credit: Owen Singel-Fletcher

Registration here.

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

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

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