federal recognition – Page 15

Assistant Secretary – Indian Affairs Kevin K. Washburn announced that the Department is extending the opportunity for public comment on a Preliminary Discussion Draft of potential changes to the Federal Acknowledgment Process by more than 30 days to September 25, 2013. This extended period is in response to written requests as well as requests received at the tribal consultation sessions and public meetings held in July and August.
The discussion draft, initially issued on June 21, 2013, is a preliminary precursor to the rulemaking process and is intended to provide tribes and the public an early opportunity to provide input on potential improvements to the Part 83 process. Once the Department begins the rulemaking process, tribes and the public will have additional opportunities to provide comment. The discussion draft is available for review at http://www.bia.gov/WhoWeAre/AS- IA/ORM/83revise/index.htm.
Comments on the discussion draft may be submitted by email to consultation@bia.gov (include “1076-AF18” in the message subject line) or by mail to: Elizabeth Appel, Office of Regulatory Affairs and Collaborative Action, U.S. Department of the Interior, 1849 C Street, N.W., MS- 4141-MIB, Washington, D.C. 20240 (include “1076-AF18” on the cover of the submission).

Summary Judgment Motions in Mishewal Wappo Tribe Federal Recognition/Termination/Trust Breach Case

August 8, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here are the materials in Mishewal Wappo Tribe of Alexander Valley v. Jewell (N.D. Cal.):

Interior Motion for Summary J

Mishewal Wappo Motion for Summary J

Interior Opposition

Mishewal Wappo Opposition

Interior Reply

Mishewal Wappo Reply

Ninth Circuit Affirms Exclusion of Counties in Termination Case Involving Mishewal Wappo Tribe

July 31, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opinion in Mishewal Wappo Tribe v. Salazar.

Excerpt:

The Counties of Napa and Sonoma (“the Counties”) appeal the district court’s revocation of their status as intervening defendants. The Counties also appeal the district court’s denial of their motion to dismiss. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm the revocation of their status as intervenors.

Briefs:

County Opening Brief

Mishewal Wappo Brief

County Reply

Michigan COA Holds that ICWA is Inapplicable to Mackinaw Band Ottawa and Chippewa Members

July 2, 2013July 1, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opinion:

In re Thibeault

Draft 25 CFR Part 83 Regs (Office of Federal Acknowledgment)

June 25, 2013June 25, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

idc1-022123

Quick Comments:

This revision strikes me as a response in some ways to the Carcieri decision. The first obvious change is that tribal groups need only to prove existence (for lack of a better word so early in the morning) dating back to 1934 instead of 1900. As a result, some of the substantive criteria has been changed due to the date change, and perhaps even liberalized to the benefit of petitioning groups.

Finally, there appears to be some changes allowing for expedited decisions favoring tribes previously recognized in some contexts, perhaps ala Tejon.

Eighth Circuit Rejects Sandy Lake Chippewa Secretarial Election Appeal — UPDATED with briefs

May 20, 2013May 21, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opinion.

The court’s syllabus:

Civil case – Indian law. Because the district court had adjudicated the issue of subject matter jurisdiction in the Sandy Lake Band’s previous suit, and Sandy Lake did not appeal from that decision or exhaust its administrative remedies, the court is bound by the district court’s original determination that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction; the district court’s dismissal order is affirmed, but modified to be without prejudice.

Briefs:

Sandy Lake Opening Brief

Federal Answering Brief

Sandy Lake Reply

Lower court materials here.

Interior Office of Inspector General Questions Recognition of Tejon Indian Tribe

May 1, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here. H/T Pechanga.

From the Interior OIG website:

The Office of Inspector General investigated former Assistant Secretary-Indian Affairs (AS-IA) Larry Echo Hawk’s decision to “reaffirm” the Tejon Indian Tribe of California in December 2011 without going through the acknowledgment process set forth in 25 C.F.R., Part 83, “Procedures for Establishing That an American Indian Group Exists as an Indian Tribe.”

We found that the Tejon Tribe, along with several other American Indian groups, submitted petitions requesting reaffirmation by the AS-IA. These petitions were outside the Part 83 acknowledgment process, which is the official process for recognizing Indian groups as tribes and is administered by the AS-IA’s Office of Federal Acknowledgment (OFA). We could not find any discernible process Echo Hawk and his staff might have used to select the Tejon Tribe for recognition above the other groups.

We also found that Echo Hawk and his staff did not consult with OFA or with Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) leadership before deciding to reaffirm the Tejon Tribe. Because OFA was not consulted, other American Indian groups with historical, genealogical, and ancestral claims to the original Tejon Indians were left out of the process. In addition, not involving BIA leadership caused budgeting and operational difficulties for BIA, which in turn slowed down the process for providing Federal services to the Tejon Tribe. The AS-IA also denied subsequent requests by BIA for additional FY 2013 funding, which was needed to provide these services for the newly recognized Tribe.

Read the complete report here.