Here are the briefs in Northern Cheyenne Tribe v. Roman Catholic Church:
St. Labre Indian School Response Brief
cultural resources
Suit Challenging Chevron Solar Energy Project Affecting Sacred Sites Dismissed
Here are the materials in La Cuna De Aztlan Sacred Sites Protection Circle Advisory Committee v. U.S. Dept. of the Interior (C.D. Cal.):
DCT Order Dismissing La Cuna Complaint
Our previous post in this case is here.
First Stewards Climate Change Symposium
Coastal First Peoples are currently gathered in Washington DC to discuss climate change impacts and response strategies. Symposium details, including live streaming video of presentations, can be found here.
DOJ Joins Plaintiffs in Challenge to South Dakota Ban on Indian Prisoner Use of Tobacco
Here is that brief:
The parties’ initial post-trial briefs are here:
Brings Plenty Post-Trial Brief
Our prior post is here.
News coverage (h/t A.E.).
Amicus Brief Supporting En Banc Petition in Save the Peaks Case
Ongoing Litigation Regarding Uranium Mining around the Grand Canyon
Tenth Circuit Rejects Challenge to Highway Project at Haskell Indian School
Here are the materials in Prairie Band Pottawatomi Nation v. Federal Highway Administration:
Kansas Dept. of Transportation Brief
Here are the lower court materials.
LTBB Tribal Council Votes Down Same-Sex Marriage Amendment, but Debate Continues
An excerpt from the Petoskey News:
The motion to approve the amendment failed on a 4-5 vote, but a second vote — passing 5-4 — put the entire tribal marriage statute that defines marriage as between a man and a woman up for legislative review.
The amendment would have made the tribe the first in Michigan to allow same-sex couples to wed. Only two tribes in the nation have adopted a similar marriage definition.
The decision would also have skirted a 2004 ballot proposal by Michigan voters that banned gay marriage for the entire state population, because the federal government recognizes tribes’ rights to govern themselves as a domestic nation.
Despite the failed vote, the issue is unlikely to be dropped.
Previous post on the topic is here. Miigwetch to C.D.
Guest Post — Brian Pierson on the Wisconsin Indian Mascot Law
While a challenge to the Wisconsin statute regulating American Indian mascots winds its way through the Wisconsin Court of Appeals (Schoolcraft v. Wisconson Dept. of Public Instruction; briefs here), Mr. Pierson — author of this amicus brief in the Schoolcraft case (PDF) kindly agreed to comment on the recent law review comment by a Marquette law student criticizing the Wisconsin legislature for enacting the law (I thought he did a nice job recognizing that the author was a law student and kept the kid gloves on to some extent)):
Mr. Heacox provides a useful time line of the Indian mascot issue in Wisconsin. His article does not engage with the legal issues, however, nor does he make a convincing case for his conclusion that legislative efforts to address the issue are misguided and that “education” is the solution.
The article provides a summary of the law’s background but no serious discussion of the underlying legal issues. The State has a legal obligation, under the state and federal constitutions, to provide a discrimination-free public education to its youth. It also has the legal authority and responsibility, under the state constitution, to eliminate practices that undermine student learning. The legislature enacted the mascot law to address both constitutional responsibilities. Are the discrimination concerns insufficient to trigger the 14th Amendment? How does the growing body of social science affect the analysis? How should the legislature weigh local sentiment against the consensus among education professionals that Indian mascots impede student understanding? Are there any legal arguments that mascots deserve protection? The author doesn’t address these issues.
Continue reading
New Scholarship on Wisconsin’s Indian Mascot Law
The Marquette Sports Law Review has published “Wisconsin Legislature Employs Halftime Adjustment: How Wisconsin’s “New” Indian Mascot Law Changes the Outlook for Future Challenges to the Use of Discriminatory Nicknames, Mascots, and Logos in Wisconsin Schools.”
An excerpt:
This Comment provides an analysis of the history of the Indian mascot controversy as it has played out in Wisconsin high schools. Part II examines Wisconsin’s pupil nondiscrimination statute, the initial legal basis employed to challenge a school district’s use of Indian names and logos. Thereafter, Part III shifts the focus to Wisconsin’s “new” Indian mascot law by providing a thorough analysis of the “new” law, including its legislative history, specific provisions, rules for enforcement, decisions, and potential responses. Next, Part IV compares the two statutes used in Wisconsin to challenge Indian mascots and discusses the effects of their differences. Finally, Part V analyzes the “new” law, proposes implications for future challenges, and offers concluding remarks on the Indian mascot controversy within Wisconsin.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.