They’re here, courtesy of the Supreme Court Project:
In support of Respondents:
Amicus Brief of Narragansett Indian Tribe
economic development
Bob Miller on Intertribal and International Treaties for Economic Development
Bob Miller has posted “Inter-Tribal and International Treaties for American Indian Economic Development,” forthcoming in the Lewis & Clark Law Review. Here is the abstract:
American Indian Tribes and Indigenous peoples around the world are among the poorest groups in their countries. Economic development is an absolutely crucial issue for these governments and their people. Recently, two different efforts have been undertaken to create beneficial development based on treaties between Indigenous groups.
In August 2007, eleven American Indian Nations, Canadian First Nations, New Zealand Maori Iwis, and Australian Aborigine groups signed a treaty to engage in international economic activities. Dozens of other American Tribes and New Zealand Iwis have also signed this treaty or will do so in the next few months. In addition, Pacific Northwest Indian Tribes have drafted an inter-tribal treaty to facilitate the conduct of business on reservations.
This Article dissects these two treaties and addresses some of the unique legal issues that these treaties raise.
False Advertising Claim against Tribal Smokeshop
In Gristede Foods v. Unkechauge Nation/Shinnecock Trading Post, the district court refused to dismiss a Lanham Act claim against a tribal retailer. The plaintiff alleges that the retailer promised tax-free sales, but didn’t deliver. This is the second motion to dismiss denied by the court.
Indian Tribal Businesses and the Off-Reservation Market
My submission to the Lewis & Clark Law Review’s symposium issue on tribal economic development, “Indian Tribal Businesses and the Off-Reservation Market” is on SSRN. If it’s not available yet, it will be in a few days. Here’s the abstract:
The pre-American trading centers of the Great Lakes – Sault Ste. Marie, Michilimackinac, and Detroit – developed as natural manifestations of economic activity involving the Indigenous peoples of the region, as well as the French, the British, and lastly the Americans. In many ways, during that period, the Indian people controlled these markets. As history turned against the Indians, the Europeans acquired control of these markets. The federal Indian law and policy manifestation of this control can be explained in the phrase “measured separatism.” While measured separatism had value for Indian and American communities for a time, as well as serious disadvantages, the need Indian law controls over the market has receded to a significant extent. The recent limitations on off-reservation gaming are manifestations of this measured separatism. These controls should be a call for tribal business interests to drop some of their reliance on federal Indian law, which creates some economic advantages, and re-enter the larger economic world.
Judith Royster on Tribal Resources and Economic Development
Judith Royster has posted “Tribal Economic Development: Practical Sovereignty, Political Sovereignty, and the Secretary’s Shrinking Role in Natural Resource Development,” part of the Lewis & Clark Indigenous Economic Development Symposium. Here is the abstract:
One of the primary means of economic development for many Indian tribes is development of the reservation’s natural resources. Despite the extent and economic importance of the resource base, however, tribal control over the development and use of tribal natural resources has historically been limited. In the last few decades, Indian tribes have gained a far greater role in decision-making concerning the use of their natural resources. In part this increased role results from tribes asserting a greater say in what occurs within their territories, and in part from new federal laws that place more of the decision-making power in tribal hands.
The three major natural resources traditionally subject to leasing are agricultural and grazing lands, forests, and minerals. Each has been subject to federal statutes that follow a similar arc – comprehensive federal control and exploitation during the allotment period; a slight loosening of federal control, tribal consent, and concern with tribal revenue streams in the reorganization period; and new approaches focusing more on tribal participation, partnerships, and increased control during the modern era of self-determination. Most recently, Congress has begun to enact a next generation of resource development statutes that authorize tribes, subject to Interior-approved general regulations, to enter into specific development agreements without federal approval. Following a review of the trajectory of tribal resource development statutes, this article explores the most wide-ranging of these new statutes: the Indian Tribal Energy Development and Self-Determination Act of 2005.
Matheson v. Gregoire Brief in Opposition to Cert Petition
ICT Article on New Grand Traverse Band Casino
From ICT:
WILLIAMSBURG, Mich. – Go green!
That might be the new motto for the Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians.
The northern Michigan tribe, which opened the doors to its rebuilt Turtle Creek Casino & Hotel in June, has received much fanfare for creating an eco-friendly gaming destination.
The project didn’t come without apprehension, though.
As GTB officials excitedly toured tribal casinos in their state and visited gaming properties in Las Vegas during planning stages of their new Turtle Creek property, they were nervous about the direction architect Stephen Knowles envisioned.
Senate Finance Committee Hearing on Tribal Tax Policy
Go Del!
From Indianz:
The Senate Finance Committee will hold a hearing on Tuesday, July 22, to address tax policy in Indian Country.
Sen. Max Baucus (D-Montana), the chairman of the committee, said the hearing will address three specific issues: the Indian Employment Tax Credit, the tax-exempt bonds for tribal governments and accelerated depreciation for tribes. Witnesses at the hearing include Dante Desiderio, an economic development specialist for the National Congress of American Indians; Del Laverdure, the chief counsel for the Crow Tribe of Montana; and Wayne A. Shammel, the general counsel of Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians in Oregon. The hearing takes place at 10am in Room 215 of the : Senate Dirksen Office Building.
Committee Notice:
Indian Governments and the Tax Code: Maximizing Tax Incentives for Economic Development (July 22, 2008 )
Meijer Appeal on Campaign Law Violations
From the Traverse City Record-Eagle:
TRAVERSE CITY — Meijer Inc. convinced a state appellate judge to hide from public view documents related to Grand Traverse County’s efforts to investigate the retailer’s campaign finance violations.
Grand Traverse County Prosecutor Alan Schneider is challenging a May 29 order signed by state Court of Appeals Judge Donald Owens that sealed the court file in Schneider’s case against Meijer and the Dickinson Wright PLLC law firm.
Schneider is trying to investigate potential violations of state campaign finance laws concerning Meijer’s illegal involvement in local elections in Acme Township in 2007 and 2005.
Schneider said Friday he filed a challenge this week to the suppression order, but declined additional comment because his appeal remains pending before the appellate court.
A motion to seal the appellate case was filed by John Pirich, a Lansing attorney hired by Meijer. Pirich’s motion remains secret, but Owens’ suppression order makes reference to state law and investigative subpoenas that “requires the maintenance of strict confidentiality of matters related to investigative subpoenas.”
South Dakota Law Review Call for Papers: Tribal Economic Development
The South Dakota Law Review is looking for submissions for its annual symposium, “Economic Development in Indian Country: An Exploration of Policy, Law, and Culture“. Here is the letter.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.