Tenth Circuit Briefs in Pueblo of Jemez v. United States [Valles Caldera]

Here:

Jemez Pueblo brief sealed

Indian Advocacy Groups Amicus Brief

Indian Law Profs Amicus Brief

Pueblo Nations Amicus Brief

US Response Brief

Gas Company Brief

Lower court materials here.

USDA Pulls Environmental Impact Statement on Oak Flat/Resolution Copper Mine [updated with CA9 Order Denying Stay Pending Appeal]

Here is the press release from Rep. Raúl Grijalva on the matter. Gizmodo coverage here.

And the briefs in Apache Stronghold v. United States (9th Cir.):

Emergency Motion

Federal Opposition

Religious Groups Amicus Brief

Religious Liberty Scholars Amicus Brief

Tribal Amicus Brief

Lower court materials here.

Update:

CA9 Order Denying Stay

Oregon Court Affirms Klamath Tribes’ Water Rights

On Wednesday, February 24, 2021, in an order from Klamath County Circuit Court Judge Cameron F. Wogan, the Oregon court again affirmed the Klamath Tribes’ water and treaty rights. Wednesday’s order rejected attacks on the Tribes’ water rights determined by the Oregon Water Resources Department (OWRD) during the administrative phase of the Klamath Basin Adjudication (KBA), affirmed the senior priority date of the Klamath Tribes’ water rights in the Klamath Basin, and upheld the need to maintain a healthy and productive habitat to meet the Tribes’ treaty right to fish, hunt, trap, and gather.

Klamath Tribes Chairman Don Gentry responded to the order, “We are pleased that Judge Wogan upheld the rulings from the administrative phase of the KBA. He reaffirmed that the 1864 treaty entered into between the Klamath Tribes and the United States reserved to the Tribes sufficient water to keep our fisheries and other aquatic resources healthy so that we can protect our natural resources and cultural traditions.”

NARF Staff Attorney Sue Noe explained, “Judge Wogan correctly affirmed quantification of the Tribal water rights based on the habitat needs of the fish, wildlife, and plants. Although he ruled that opponents of the Tribal rights will have another chance to try to reduce the amounts by showing the Tribes don’t need all the water awarded by OWRD to meet their livelihood needs, Judge Wogan made clear in no uncertain terms that the amounts cannot be below what is necessary to provide healthy and productive habitat.”

Importantly, like all other courts that have considered the issue, Judge Wogan ruled that the Klamath Tribes’ water rights extend to Upper Klamath Lake. Upper Klamath Lake forms part of the border of the former Reservation and provides critical habitat for the endangered c’waam and koptu (Lost River and shortnose sucker fish), which are sacred fish species traditionally harvested by the Tribes.

Represented by NARF, the Klamath Tribes successfully achieved recognition of their treaty-reserved water rights in federal court litigation in the 1970s and 1980s in United States v. Adair, but the federal courts left quantification of the water rights to the state adjudication in the KBA. After the successful conclusion of the KBA’s 38-year administrative phase, the Tribes were able to begin enforcing their water rights for the first time in 2013. The administrative determinations are presently on review in the Klamath County Circuit Court and Judge Wogan’s ruling is the latest to come out of that process.

Fond du Lac Ojibwe Challenge to Mine Proceeds

Here are the materials so far in Fond Du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa v. Wheeler (D. Minn.):

51 Amended Complaint

58 Poly Met Mining Motion to Dismiss

63 EPA Motion to Dismiss

67 Tribe Response

70 Poly Met Reply

72 EPA Reply

77 DCT Order

Briefing in Attempt to Enjoin Copper Mining Project at Chi’chil Biłdagoteel [Oak Flat]

Here are the materials in Apache Stronghold v. United States (D. Ariz.):

1 Complaint

7 Motion for TRO

18 US Response

23 Reply in Support of 7

50 US Closing Brief

51 Apache Stronghold Closing Brief

56 Amicus Brief

Federal Court Denies Injunction on Enbridge Line 3, Too

Here are the materials in Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians v. United States Army Corps of Engineers (D.D.C.):

28 Enbridge Opposition

29 Army Corps Opposition

33 Reply

42 DCT Order

Prior post here.

Minnesota COA Refuses to Shut Down Enbridge Line 3

Here is the order:

2021-02-02 Order Denying Stay

D.C. Circuit Affirms Order that DAPL Easement is Illegal, but Does Not Require Shutdown of Pipeline

Here is the opinion in Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. United States Army Corps of Engineers.

An excerpt:

Lake Oahe, created when the United States Army Corps of Engineers flooded thousands of acres of Sioux lands in the Dakotas by constructing the Oahe Dam on the Missouri River, provides several successor tribes of the Great Sioux Nation with water for drinking, industry, and sacred cultural practices. Passing beneath Lake Oahe’s waters, the Dakota Access Pipeline transports crude oil from North Dakota to Illinois. Under the Mineral Leasing Act, 30 U.S.C. § 185, the pipeline could not traverse the federally owned land at the Oahe crossing site without an easement from the Corps. The question presented here is whether the Corps
violated the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. § 4321, by issuing that easement without preparing an environmental impact statement despite substantial criticisms from the Tribes and, if so, what should be done about that failure. We agree with the district court that the Corps acted unlawfully, and we affirm the court’s order vacating the easement while the Corps prepares an environmental impact statement. But we reverse the court’s order to the extent it directed that the pipeline be shut down and emptied of oil.

Briefs here.

HCN: “Bears Ears is just the beginning”

Here.

San Carlos Apache Tribe Sues US Forest Service to Protect Oak Flat

Here is the complaint in San Carlos Apache Tribe v. USFS (D. Ariz.):

1 Complaint

Press release here.