Here are the new materials in Pro-Football Inc. v. Blackhorse (E.D. Va.):
Prior materials here.
cultural resources
Third Circuit Accepts NCAI and Sen. Nighthorse Campbell Amicus Briefs in Jim Thorpe Appeal
Here:
ORDER (MCKEE, Chief and Circuit Judge) granting motions of the National Congress of the American Indians and Ben Nighthorse Campbell to file in support of the petition for rehearing. The Clerk is directed to file the briefs on the docket as statements in support of rehearing and circulate them to the full Court. No response by Appellant is required unless the court directs, filed. [13-2446, 13-2451] (TMK)
Are Elfin Sites More Sacred to Icelanders than Native Sacred Sites are to Americans?
Yes, it appears.
Former U.S. Attorney Kris Olsen has this piece titled “Indigenous Rights? Of Hiddenfolk and Native People” in the Oregon State Bar Bulletin.
ABA Journal Article on American Indian Religious Freedom Post-Hobby Lobby
Colorado River Indian Tribes Sue Interior over Modified Blythe Solar Power Project
Here is the complaint in Colorado River Indian Tribes v. Dept. of Interior (C.D. Cal.):
An excerpt:
This complaint challenges the actions of Defendants U.S. Department of Interior, U.S. Bureau of Land Management, and their officials (collectively, “BLM” or “Defendants”) in approving the Modified Blythe Solar Power Project (“Blythe II” or “Project”), a utility-scale solar energy generation facility slated for development on federal land northwest of Blythe, California. As set forth below, this Court has jurisdiction over this action because it presents questions of federal law, involves federal defendants, and involves a federally recognized Indian tribe as plaintiff in a suit against federal defendants. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1361, 1362.
The Project site is located within the ancestral homelands of the members of the Colorado River Indian Tribes (“CRIT” or “Tribes”), whose reservation begins just a few miles northeast of the site. The religion and culture of CRIT’s members are strongly connected to the physical environment of the area, including the ancient trails, petroglyphs, grindstones, hammerstones, and other cultural resources known to exist there. The removal or destruction of these artifacts and the development of the Project as planned will cause CRIT, its government, and its members irreparable harm.
Third Circuit En Banc Petition Materials in Thorpe v. Borough of Jim Thorpe (UPDATED)
Here:
Petition for Rehearing (12-8-14)
NCAI Mtn for Leave and Proposed Brief in Support Filed 12-8-14
Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell amicus brief
Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell motion for leave to file amicus brief
UPDATE:
Borough Opposition to NCAI Amicus Brief
NCAI Reply in Support of Amicus Motion
Third Circuit panel materials here.
D.C. Bar Assoc. Panel on Hobby Lobby and American Indian Religious Freedom
Religious Freedoms of Native Americans Following the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby Decision
Date & Time: Thursday, November 13, 2014 from 5:30pm to 7:30pm
CLE Credit: No
Event Description
“[T]he religious practices of the American Indian . . . are an integral part of their culture, tradition and heritage, such practices forming the basis of Indian identity and value systems.” 42 U.S.C. § 1996. As such, religious practice is the cornerstone of Native culture and has held Native communities together for centuries. Walter Echo- Hawk, Native Worship in American Prisons, 19.4 CULTURAL SURVIVAL Q. (Winter 1995). The federal government regulates the use of bald eagle parts and religious practices while incarcerated. The panel will explore the exercise of Native American religious practices after the Supreme Court’s decision in Hobby Lobby.
The panelists will discuss the tensions between the federal government’s efforts to accommodate tribal religion and the dissatisfaction of the tribal community, recent case law developments and whether the federal government is providing the least restrictive means in furtherance of protecting eagles and maintaining prisons.
This evening program is sponsored by the Indian Law Committee of the Environment, Energy and Natural Resources Section, in cosponsorship with the Native American Bar Association-DC. Doors open at 5:00 p.m.
Location
Greenberg Traurig
2101 L Street, NW
Suite 1000
Washington DC 20037
Map it
Contact Information
Email: SectionsEvents@dcbar.org
Phone: 202-626-3463
Fax: 202-824-1877
Speakers
- Professor Patty Ferguson-Bohnee, Arizona State University
- Professor Kathryn Kovacs, Rutgers University
- Joel Williams, Native American Rights Fund
- Andrew Mergen, Department of Justice, Acting Chief Appellate Section, Environment and Natural Resources Division (Moderator)
Gun Lake Tribe Hosts Science and Cultural Presentation on Wolves
Third Circuit Holds NAGPRA Does Not Require Repatriation of Jim Thorpe’s Remains
Here is the opinion in Thorpe v. Borough of Jim Thorpe:
Jim Thorpe Opinion [Update — the clerk has withdrawn this version of the opinion for quality control.]
An excerpt:
Thorpe’s remains are located at their final resting place and have not been disturbed. We find that applying NAGPRA to Thorpe’s burial in the Borough is such a clearly absurd result and so contrary to Congress’s intent to protect Native American burial sites that the Borough cannot be held to the requirements imposed on a museum under these circumstances. We reverse the District Court and hold that the Borough is not a “museum” under NAGPRA for the purposes of Thorpe’s burial.
Briefs here and here. Oral argument audio here.
Lower court materials here.
Summary Judgment Materials in Bivens Action by Estatet of Deceased Indian Graverobber
Here are the materials in Estate of Redd v. Love (D. Utah):
An excerpt:
This case arises following the tragic suicide of Dr. James D. Redd after his arrest for trafficking in stolen Native American artifacts, theft of government property, and theft of tribal property. The Estate of Dr. Redd brings this Bivens action against Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Agents Daniel Love and Dan Barnes. The Estate of Dr. Redd asserts that Agent Love and Agent Barnes violated Dr. Redd’s constitutional rights [2] by: (1) providing false information to obtain a warrant for Dr. Redd’s arrest and authorizing a search of his home; (2) using the illegally obtained search warrant to search Dr. Redd’s home; (3) using excessive force against Dr. Redd primarily by sending approximately 140 agents, many of whom were heavily armed and clothed in flak jackets, to raid and search Dr. Redd’s home; (4) violating Dr. Redd’s equal protection rights; and (5) violating Dr. Redd’s right to due process.
Defendants move to dismiss, arguing qualified immunity shields them from Dr. Redd’s claims. After careful consideration and for the reasons stated below, the court finds that Agent Love and Agent Barnes are entitled to qualified immunity on Plaintiffs’ first, second, fourth, and fifth causes of action because Dr. Redd has failed to allege enough facts to state a claim for relief that is plausible on its face. But, the court finds that Dr. Redd has pleaded facts that, if true, are sufficient to show that officials violated Dr. Redd’s clearly established constitutional right of protection against excessive force when Defendants employed between about 80 to 140 agents to raid and search Dr. Redd’s home.
And:
In January 1996, the Redds visited and collected Native American artifacts from an area they believed to be privately owned. Unbeknownst to the Redds, the BLM map they relied on was inaccurately drawn. The Redds were, in fact, collecting Native American artifacts from Cottonwood Wash, a Hopi ancestral burial ground. The Redds were arrested and charged with desecration of a human body. The arrest ultimately resulted in Mrs. Redd entering an Alford Plea in which she admitted no criminal conduct, and agreed to pay $10,000 to settle a civil suit related to the act. The state dropped all charges against Dr. Redd.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.