A.A. v. Needville Materials Update

We filed a short amicus brief in A.A. v. Needville Indep. Sch. District before the Fifth Circuit (Needville-Historian Amicus Brief) on behalf of Drs. Suzanne Cross and K. Tsianina Lomawaima. The Lipan Apache Tribe also filed an amicus brief (Lipan Apache 5th Cir Amicus 2009).

The ACLU of Texas is lead counsel in this case, a challenge to a Texas public school’s decision to suspend a kindergarden student because he refused to cut his long hair. He is a member of the Lipan Apache Tribe. The family was successful before the district court, but the school district appealed.

Other materials:

Arocha DCT Order

Appellees Brief

Appellants Brief

Amicus Brief in American Indian Religious Freedom Case

We filed a short amicus brief in A.A. v. Needville Indep. Sch. District before the Fifth Circuit (Needville-Historian Amicus Brief) on behalf of Drs. Suzanne Cross and K. Tsianina Lomawaima.

The ACLU of Texas is lead counsel in this case, a challenge to a Texas public school’s decision to suspend a kindergarden student because he refused to cut his long hair. He is a member of the Lipan Apache Tribe. The family was successful before the district court, but the school district appealed.

Other materials:

Arocha DCT Order

Appellees Brief

2009.04.27 Appellants Brief

BLT: Government Moves to Dismiss Geronimo/Skull and Bones Case

Here is the motion — Obama Motion to Dismiss

From BLT:

Justice Department lawyers have moved to dismiss claims against the government in a lawsuit over the remains of the legendary Apache warrior Geronimo.

In February, a group of Native Americans claiming to have descended from the 19th century military leader sued the government, as well as Yale University and the Order of the Skull and Bones, in an attempt to retrieve Geronimo’s remains. After his death in 1909, Geronimo’s body was buried at the Fort Sill United States Army Base in Lawton, Oklahoma. But according to popular lore, members of the Yale secret society broke into his tomb and stole his skull, which it now keeps on display in New Haven.

Continue reading

Indictments in Grave Robbing Cases

Here are two of the indictments in the grave robbing cases reported on Indianz and the NYTs US v Patterson Indictment 1 and US v Patterson Indictment 2.

Indian Religious Freedom at Colfax Cemetery

From the Sac Bee:

Little peace for Colfax Indian Cemetery

smagagnini@sacbee.com

Published Tuesday, May. 26, 2009

When a tree falls in the Colfax Indian Cemetery, who hears it?

Kathy Keck and her dogs, cats, goats and horses did when one of the cemetery’s giant Ponderosa pines crushed part of her fence one stormy February night in 2007.

So began a controversy that closed the cemetery where local chiefs are buried and raised an outcry from area Indians who claim their religious freedom is being violated.

Keck, whose family has lived in harmony with the cemetery and the Maidu, Miwok and Nisenan who have used it since the 1800s, sued in small claims court and won $3,000 from the Colfax Cemetery District.

Until Keck’s suit, both the district and the Colfax Todds Valley Consolidated Tribe believed the Indians owned the cemetery.

Continue reading

Major League Baseball Pulls Chief Wahoo From Stars and Stripes Cap

From Yahoo:

MLB pulls Chief Wahoo off Cleveland’s ’09 Stars and Stripes cap

Major League Baseball is rolling out a new round of Stars and Stripes caps for Memorial Day and it appears that they designed the lids with some common sense this time around.

Please remember last season, when the first round of special hats included a stars-and-stripes emblazoned version of Chief Wahoo on Cleveland’s cap. A mini-controversy erupted with most people agreeing that it probably wasn’t a good idea to endorse the logo with the elements of the American flag and the ideals that it represents.

Continue reading

Interesting E-mail Exchange About the Redskins Case at the Firm Representing the Team

Above the Law, a blog (or “blawg”) about law firms and other law related stuff, has a post about an e-mail exchange between lawyers at Quinn Emmanuel, the firm that represented the Redskins in their recent victory. After the partner in charge of the case sent a firmwide message boasting about the victory, a first-year associate replied to the entire firm and essentially suggested that the firm was on the wrong side of the battle.

Check it out here.

Quinn Emanuel Associate Has Reservations About ‘Redskin’ Victory

quinn redskins.jpgHere’s a post devoted to the perils of “Reply All” and idealism among first-year associates. Brought to you by the attorneys of Quinn Emanuel.

The firm just celebrated a victory in its Washington Redskins case, reports the Washington Post:

A federal appeals court yesterday handed the Washington Redskins another victory in their long-running legal dispute with Native American activists over the team’s name.

The appeals court did not address whether the name was offensive but upheld a federal judge’s ruling last year that a Native American man had waited too long to challenge six Redskins trademarks.

AmLaw Daily reports that Quinn attorney Robert Raskopf, who has been working on the case for as long it has been since the Redskins have seen a Superbowl stadium, was pretty psyched about the victory:

Raskopf was in a good mood when we spoke with him about the appellate win. He’s been on the case since it started 17 years ago. “It’s a great win for the team,” said Raskopf, who had help from Quinn partner Sanford Weisburst on the brief. “I’m so happy for the Redskins and their fans.”

Raskopf was so happy on Friday that he sent out a firm-wide victory e-mail. But not everybody was thrilled. After bouncing around the firm and racking up some responses, the victory chain made its way to our inbox via a tipster:

This is too good not to share. This was sent to all Quinn attorneys.

The First Year Associate Who Shat All Over Raskopf’s Victory Email OR The First Year Associate Who Repurposed the Redskins

After the jump, see the chain that culminates in a (soon-to-be-fired?) first-year associate’s plea for idealistic litigation at Quinn.

Continue reading

Yahoo: Redskins Need a New Nickname

An incredibly rare sportswriter, Michael Silver, who objects to the Redskins (thanks to Bob). From Yahoo:

Last Friday, in a judicial decision that hinged on a legal technicality, the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., upheld the right of the local pro football team to keep its unconscionable nickname.

Gloated team attorney Bob Raskopf, “It’s a great day for the Redskins and their fans and their owner, Dan Snyder.”

Alas, it was another shameful day for America.

Photo Redskins helmet.

(Stephen J. Boitano/AP Photo)

In clinging to the most racially offensive moniker held by a major U.S. professional sports team since the Emancipation Proclamation – yes, I know, since forever – the franchise continues to offend some Native Americans and assault the sensibilities of a citizenry that should be long past such insensitive and shallow depictions.

How can a large majority of us not be offended? Imagine trying to explain “Redskins” to a foreign visitor or a time-traveler from the future? Every time I say the word, I throw up in my mouth a little and wonder why there is no widespread outrage.

I’ve heard all the arguments about why this name should be allowed to exist, and they move me about as much as Jim Zorn’s red-zone offense in a tight game against a strong opponent. (Sorry – I realize that was a cheap shot. Besides, I wouldn’t want to get ‘Skins fans ticked off at me or anything.)

You can spare me the protestations about how the name is actually a tribute to Native Americans, or how other allegedly similar groups (Vikings? Really?) are also consigned to mascot status. You can skip the talk about the importance of the team name to its fans or the tradition that would be compromised were it to be changed.

I’m not hearing it, because if I close my eyes and think about where we are as a society and the fact that this name still exists, it’s a complete travesty on both visceral and logical levels.

Would we “honor,” say, Chicago’s African-American population by calling its NFL team the Brownskins?

Continue reading

NYTs: Wampum Belts Pulled from Sothesby’s Auction

From the NYTs:

Sotheby’s has removed two ceremonial Indian wampum belts from an auction scheduled for Wednesday following complaints by the Onondaga nation that the belts were part of their cultural heritage and should be returned.

Skip to next paragraph

Sotheby’s New York

One of two wampum belts pulled from a sale; it may have fetched $15,000 or more.

Sotheby’s issued a statement on Monday saying that the estate of a collector that had consigned the belts had decided to withdraw them “in order to review the information presented” by the Onondaga.

The statement also said the decision to take the belts out of the Wednesday sale had been made “pending further discussion with the Haudenosaunee Standing Committee.” The Haudenosaunee is a confederacy that includes the Onondaga and five other nations.

Sotheby’s had estimated that one of the belts would sell for $15,000 to $20,000 and the other would go for $20,000 to $30,000.

Onondaga leaders had threatened to attend the auction and stand silently in protest as the bidding progressed.

They had sent Sotheby’s a package of letters from Indian leaders and scholars last week describing the two items and outlining their objections to the sale. One expert said the two belts were probably made between 1760 and 1820.

Wampum belts “represent our sacred history, the founding principles of our laws and life-ways and the importance of agreements that we have made between nations,” Christine G. Abrams, a member of the Haudenosaunee Standing Committee, said in a letter to Sotheby’s. “Wampum belts are our legal documents and records, which also combine sacred knowledge, forming the basis of our identity today.”

Shannon Keller O’Loughlin, a lawyer for the Onondaga nation, said the Onondaga considered the belts community property that were never owned by any one person, and that no Onondaga had ever had the authority to sell or transfer them. “Therefore,” she wrote in a letter to Sotheby’s last week, “these belts were originally taken out of these communities without proper ‘title.’ ”

How that happened remains a mystery, according to the letters the Haudenosaunee sent Sotheby’s.

“It is not clear how or why these two wampum belts were removed from native ownership,” wrote Margaret M. Bruchac, the coordinator of Native American studies at the University of Connecticut’s Avery Point campus in Groton.

Both belts were once in the collection of the Museum of the American Indian, a forerunner of the National Museum of the American Indian in Lower Manhattan, and Ms. O’Loughlin said the Museum of the American Indian had “deaccessioned” them. Deaccession is a term used by museums to describe the process of taking items out of their collections and make them available for sale or exchange.

Sotheby’s said the belts had come from a collection belonging to Herbert G. Wellington Jr., the chairman of an old-line stock brokerage firm before his death in 2005.

Mr. Wellington’s collection included objects from a number of North American tribes and was exhibited at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in 1983.

Sotheby’s said the representatives of the estate declined to talk about the dispute.

Ms. O’Loughlin also questioned whether the deaccessioning had been done properly. That issue was investigated in the 1970s by the state attorney general at the time, Louis J. Lefkowitz.

A trustee of the Museum of the American Indian, the anthropologist Edmund Carpenter, had complained that art dealers were permitted to “go shopping” for American Indian rarities at a museum warehouse in the Bronx.

Sam Deloria on Yale and Geronimo

From the Yale Alumni Magazine:

Yale seems reluctant to dig into the controversy over whether Skull and Bones has Geronimo’s skull and bones. But the university’s most prominent Native American alumnus wants his alma mater to take a stand.

A federal lawsuit by Geronimo’s great-grandson is on hold for now against the university and the secret society. Nonetheless, “I would like to see Yale say to Skull and Bones, ‘Give them back whatever you have or you’re finished at Yale,'” says Sam Deloria ’64, recipient of the university’s first Native Alumni Achievement Award in 2005.

Deloria, a member of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and director of the American Indian Graduate Center in New Mexico, recognizes that “that’s not going to happen,” thanks to what he calls “institutional cowardice” and the “powerful, powerful people” — including both Bush presidents — who belong to Skull and Bones.

Still, he would like to see Yale take a public stand on the efforts of Geronimo’s descendants to find out whether Skull and Bones really has any of the Apache warrior’s remains. “An acknowledgment that the tribes and the families have some concern would be a start.”

Continue reading