Here is the per curiam opinion in Mackinac Tribe v. Jewell.
Judge Brown filed a concurrence criticizing Interior for its delays.
Briefs here.
Here is the per curiam opinion in Mackinac Tribe v. Jewell.
Judge Brown filed a concurrence criticizing Interior for its delays.
Briefs here.
Here is the opinion in Poarch Band of Creek Indians v. Hildreth.
An excerpt:
The Poarch Band of Creek Indians (“Poarch Band”) sued James Hildreth,
Tax Assessor of Escambia County, Alabama, for declaratory and injunctive relief to prevent the assessment of property taxes on lands owned by the Poarch Band in Escambia County, Alabama, and held in trust by the United States (“Trust Property”). The Poarch Band maintains the Trust Property is exempt from taxation pursuant to the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 (“IRA”). See 25 U.S.C. § 465.1 The district court granted injunctive relief barring the tax assessment efforts during the pendency of the case, and Hildreth appeals.2 Finding no abuse of discretion and no error of law, we affirm.
Briefs here.
Here, filed in the Central District of California:
Final Order re Acknowledgment 62ibia122
Download press release here.
On January 28, 2016, the Pamunkey Indian Tribe’s July 2, 2015 Final Determination for Federal Acknowledgment (the “Final Determination”) became effective as a result of a final dismissal of a request for reconsideration entered by the Interior Board of Indian Appeals (the “IBIA”). In re Federal Acknowledgment of the Pamunkey Indian Tribe, 62 IBIA 122 (01/28/2016). The IBIA explained that Stand Up for California! (“Stand Up”), an organization that focuses on gambling issues affecting California, failed to show that it is an “interested party” to the Final Determination within the meaning of the Federal acknowledgment regulations, and therefore the IBIA concluded that Stand Up is not entitled to seek reconsideration of the Final Determination.
Here is the notice from the Federal Register:
Lorinda Riley has published “When a Tribal Entity Becomes a Nation: The Role of Politics in the Shifting Federal Recognition Regulations,” in the American Indian Law Review.
Here is a description excerpted from the article’s introduction:
This article explores how each presidential administration has both shaped and bent the federal recognition regulations to fulfill its political priorities. By merging a quantitative analysis of each administration’s federal recognition record and the political realities that each administration faced, this study provides a rare inquiry into the political nature of the recognition process. First, this article examines the regulatory history of federal recognition, including a detailed discussion of various versions of the regulation and accompanying guidance published by the Department of the Interior (DOI). Then the article provides an overview of how politics play into the regulatory process and the implementation of regulation. Finally, the article re-visits each administration’s actions related to federal recognition, and considers how each administration has utilized these regulations to serve its own political priorities.
Here are the materials in Wyandot Nation of Kansas v. United States (Fed. Cl.):
Here is the complaint in Agua Caliente Tribe of Cupeño Indians of the Pala Reservation v. Washburn (E.D. Cal.):
You must be logged in to post a comment.