federal recognition – Page 16

Interior Office of Inspector General Questions Recognition of Tejon Indian Tribe

May 1, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher

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.

Federal Court Rejects Challenge to Interior’s Denial of Historic Eastern Pequots Federal Recognition Petition

April 2, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Historic Eastern Pequots v. Salazar (D. D.C.):

DCT Order Dismissing Complaint

Historic Eastern Pequot Complaint

Interior Motion to Dismiss

Connecticut Amicus Brief

Plaintiffs’ Opposition

Interior Reply

Federal Court Holds Bush-Era Denial of Duquamish Federal Recognition Violated APA

March 25, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Hansen v. Salazar (W.D. Wash.):

DCT Order Granting Hansen Motion

Hansen Motion for Summary J

Interior Cross-Motion

Muckleshoot Response

Hansen Reply

D.C. Circuit Affirms Interior’s Decision Not to Recognize Muwekma Ohlone

March 1, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opinion in Muwekma Ohlone Tribe v. Salazar:

CADC Opinion

Briefs are here.

Lower court materials are here.

Split Ninth Circuit Orders Federal Prosecutors to Prove Federal Recognition Status of Tribes in Major Crimes Act Prosecutions…

January 21, 2013January 21, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher4 Comments

… to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.

Here are the materials in United States v. Zepeda:

CA9 opinion

CA9 memorandum (related opinion on other issues)

Zepeda Opening Brief

US Answer Brief

Zepeda Reply Brief

US Supplemental Brief

Zepeda Supplemental Brief

The court’s summary:

The panel reversed jury convictions under the Major Crimes Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1153, which provides for federal jurisdiction over certain crimes committed by Indians in Indian country.
The panel held that whether a given tribe is federally recognized, as required for jurisdiction under § 1153, is a question of fact for the jury, not a question of law for the court; and rejected the government’s request that this court take judicial notice of the Bureau of Indian Affairs’s list of federally recognized tribes in 2008 and 2010.
The panel held that a Certificate of Enrollment in an Indian tribe, entered into evidence through the parties’ stipulation, is insufficient evidence for a rational juror to find beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant is an Indian for purposes of § 1153, where the government offers no evidence that the defendant’s bloodline is derived from a federally recognized tribe.
Dissenting, Judge Watford would hold that federal recognition of an Indian tribe is a question of law for the court to resolve.

First Nations protests over Canadian Bill C-45

December 10, 2012Matthew Campbell

Articles can be found here, here, and here, among other places.

A snippet of one of the articles here:

Approximately 200 people braved the cold to attend a Bill C-45 Prayer Gathering in front of the Saskatchewan Legislature on Sunday. The event was part of a growing opposition from First Nations communities against the second federal omnibus budget implementation bill.

The far-reaching bill includes changes to the Indian Act, the Navigable Waters Protection Act and the Fisheries Act, among others.

According to many First Nations groups these changes will have a drastic and negative affect on their communities and were proposed without proper consultation.

“We hope that Canadian society and the Saskatchewan public will stand with us and not let this happen,” said Chief Barry Kennedy of Carry the Kettle First Nation.

Schaghticoke Tribal Nation Non-Intercourse Act Land Claims Dismissed

October 10, 2012Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here are the materials in United States v. 43.47 Acres of Land, More or Less, Situated in The County of Litchfield, Town of Kent (D. Conn.):

Pro Se Complaint Seeking Kern Valley Indian Community Recognition Dismissed

October 2, 2012Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Lenares v. Salazar (E.D. Cal.):

DCT Order Dismissing Lenares Complaint

Lenares Complaint Part 1

Lenares Complaint Part 2

Brothertown Indian Nation Petition for Federal Recognition Denied

September 7, 2012Kate Fort2 Comments

Press release here.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Acting Assistant Secretary – Indian Affairs Donald E. “Del” Laverdure today issued a final determination on a petition for federal acknowledgment, declining to acknowledge the Brothertown Indian Nation (Brothertown) as an Indian tribe under federal law. Brothertown is located in Wisconsin and first submitted its petition in 1980.
In the final determination on the Brothertown petition, the acting Assistant Secretary determined that the group previously had a relationship with the United States, but had its tribal status terminated by an 1839 Act of Congress. The Department’s regulations prohibit the Assistant Secretary from acknowledging a petitioning group where Congress previously terminated the tribal status of that group. Only Congress may restore the tribal status of Brothertown and its government-to-government relationship with the United States.