Upstate Citizens Claims re: Oneida Fee to Trust Fail (Mostly)

Here are the materials in Upstate Citizens for Equality v. Salazar (N.D. N.Y.), a companion to Central New York Fair Business Assn. v. Salazar (N.D. N.Y.):

DCT Order Granting Partial Summary Judgment

US Motion for Partial Dismissal

Plaintiff Response to Motion for Partial Dismissal

US Reply re Partial Dismissal

US Motion to Dismiss Supplemental Claim

Plaintiff Response to Motion to Dismiss Supp Claim

US Reply re Supp Claim

Is the Indian Tobacco Market Dead?

Maybe. News articles from Indianz and the NYTs.

NPR on Mashantucket Pequot Labor Deal

From NPR:

American Indian casinos are big business in the United States, with an estimated 280,000 people employed across more than 400 sites.

That huge workforce is largely unorganized. Only a few such casinos recognize union contracts. Among them is North America’s largest gaming center, Foxwoods Resort Casino in Connecticut.

Its dealers recently struck a deal after a lengthy dispute with the Mashantucket Pequot Tribe. What makes this agreement different is that it was brokered under tribal law.

Unionizing Casinos

Continue reading

Stewart v. Coffey — Tribal Gaming Employment Claims Dismissed

Here is the unpublished opinion by the Tenth Circuit, rejecting wrongful discharge claims under federal statutes and under Bivens, and affirming tribal immunity.

Here is the tribal brief: Comanche Brief.

LTBB News on Open Meetings and Bell’s Fishery

From Indianz:

The Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians of Michigan is reportedly considering a new open meetings policy.

The tribal council at one point barred non-members from council meetings. The policy changed and The Petoskey News-Review has been able to cover most of the meetings but the paper was recently barred from an election board meeting.

According to the the tribal code, the tribal council, by motion, can bar non-members from its meetings. However, the tribal constitution says the tribal cannot make any laws abridging the freedom of the press.

A draft statute of a new open meetings policy was discussed at a tribal council meeting on Sunday but the paper wasn’t present for that portion of the meeting.

Get the Story:

Tribe comes to aid of Bell’s; discusses open meetings statute (The Petoskey News-Review 3/9)

Lance Morgan on the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Crow Creek Sioux Tribe Settles IRS Dispute

News article here (prior legal materials here) (h/t Pechanga and Indianz):

The Crow Creek Sioux Tribe has settled its tax debt with the Internal Revenue Service and lined up a loan that will enable it to buy back the 11 square miles of land the IRS sold at auction in December, the tribal chairman said.

A stipulation filed in court last week indicates the tribe will dismiss its lawsuit, which sought to prevent the IRS from selling the Hyde County land. That will cancel a May 4 trial.

The IRS took the unusual step of seizing and selling the land because the tribe refused to pay $3.12 million in employment taxes, penalties and interest it racked up since 2001.

At $2.58 million, the winning bid did not fully satisfy the debt. But tribal chairman Brandon Sazue, who met with government officials in Washington last week, said the IRS is forgiving what’s left.

“We don’t owe the IRS anything at this point in time, as long as we drop the lawsuit,” Sazue said. Continue reading

Federal Court Orders Bois Forte Band Casino to Comply with NLRB Subpoena

Here are the materials so far in NLRB v. Fortune Bay Resort Casino (D. Minn.):

NLRB Motion for Subpoena Duces Tecum

Bois Forte Band Response to Motion for Subpoena

NLRB Reply in Support of Motion

Fortune Bay Magistrate Report

Bois Forte Band Objection to Magistrate Report

NLRB Response to Objection

Fortune Bay DCT Order Granting Subpoena Duces Tecum Motion

Wells Fargo v. LDF Update — Motion to Vacate Judgment

New materials here:

Wells Fargo Motion to Vacate

Michael Cox Expert Report (response to Kevin Washburn expert report)

William Newby Declaration

Older materials here.

Smith and Baum on Labor Laws and Indian Country

from ICT:

There’s an old adage that law professors like to use: Bad facts make bad law; in the area of tribal labor and employment law, watch out – if the facts set up the wrong way, irreparable damage will be done to tribal self-government in this field. This is a problem (or opportunity) for tribal sovereignty in the way that the test case ofBrown v. Board of Education was for the civil rights movement.

There’s been plenty of “bad press” about tribes “getting away with” practices in the workplace that may look wrong to outsiders. The assertion of sovereign immunity against individual employees may exacerbate tensions. In dismissing an action for unpaid wages brought by tribal employees, the Crow Court of Appeals recently warned, “If the tribe does not take steps to enact appropriate waivers of sovereign immunity, we believe it is only a question of when Congress will do it for us.” The Crow Tribe later enacted law to protect its workforce.

There’s an old adage that law professors like to use: Bad facts make bad law; in the area of tribal labor and employment law, watch out.

It’s probably more likely that the Supreme Court, not Congress, will decide whether tribes and their enterprises must succumb to federal authority over union rights, age and other discrimination laws, and a host of other federal laws governing employment relations. For now anyway, Congress is distracted by other issues. So what will a case look like that goes up to the high court?

With non-Indians taking up employment positions in Indian country in droves, federal agencies are looking for opportunities to enforce federal labor laws of general application against tribes. Tribes cannot assert the sovereign immunity defense against the United States; so these cases go forward. The question becomes whether Congress (when silent on the issue) intended such laws to apply to tribes.
Continue reading