Contributors
Category Archives: federal recognition
Today is 25th Anniversary of Pokagon Band Potawatomi, Little Traverse Odawa, and Little River Ottawa Federal Acknowledgment Statutes
public-law-103-323.pdf [Pokagon Band Restoration Act] public-law-103-324-2.pdf [LTBB/LRB Reaffirmation Act] 1993-house-committee-hearing.pdf 1994-senate-committee-hearing.pdf h.-rep.-103-620.pdf h.-rep.-103-621.pdf
Ninth Circuit Decides Agua Caliente Tribe of Cupeno Indians v. Sweeney (formerly Black)
Here is the opinion. Briefs here.
Federal Court Affirms BIA Recognition Decision in Cayuga Nation Leadership Dispute
Here are the materials in Cayuga Nation v. Bernhardt (D.D.C.): 47 Plaintiff Cayuga MSJ 50-1 Defendant Cayuga MSJ 51 Federal MSJ 57 Plaintiff Cayuga Reply 59 Reformatted Plaintiff Cayuga MSJ 63 Defendant Cayuga Reply 64 Federal Reply 72 DCT Order … Continue reading
Federal Court Rejects Tolowa Nation Effort for Federal Recognition
Here are the materials in Tolowa Nation v. United States (N.D. Cal.): 37 Tolowa MSJ 39 US Cross Motion 40 Tolowa Reply 42 Reply 53 DCT Order Prior posts here and here.
Ninth Circuit Rules in Favor of US in Frank’s Landing Gaming Case
Here is the opinion in Frank’s Landing Indian Community v. National Indian Gaming Commission. Briefs here.
Burt Lake & Interior Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment
Here are the materials in Burt Lake Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians v. Bernhardt (D.D.C.): 27-1 Burt Lake MSJ 30 DOI Cross Motion 32 Burt Lake Reply Prior posts here and here.
Posted in Author: Matthew L.M. Fletcher, federal recognition, Michigan Indian, Regulations, Research
Tagged 25 CFR Part 83, Burt Lake Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians v. Bernhardt, Burt Lake Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians v. Jewell, Burt Lake Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians v. Zinke, federal recognition
Ninth Circuit Materials in Agua Caliente Tribe of Cupeno Indians v. Black
Here are the briefs: opening brief answer brief reply Oral argument video here.
Federal Court Holds Nonrecognized Tribe May Not Issue Hunting and Fishing Permits But Does Not Issue Injunction under 18 U.S.C. § 1343
Here are the materials in United States v. Uintah Valley Shoshone Tribe (D. Utah): 2 Complaint 3 Motion for TRO 14 Response 15 Response 26 Defendants Brief on Plenary Power 45 Federal Motion for Summary J 47 Opposition 48 Opposition … Continue reading
Federal Court Denies Siletz Intervention in Chinook Suit against US
Here are the new materials in Chinook Indian Nation v. Zinke (W.D. Wash.): 58 Siletz Motion to Intervene 61 Chinook Opposition 73 Siletz Reply 76 DCT Order Prior posts here.
WaPo Profile of Lumbee Nationhood Struggle
Here is “What Makes Someone Native American? One tribe’s long struggle for full recognition.” Materials on the Nakai case are here and here.
