Amici Supporting Big Lagoon Rancheria’s En Banc Petition

Here:

Big Lagoon v California – 64 – US brief

Big Lagoon v California – 67-2 – NCAI USET brief

Big Lagoon v California – 68 – CILS Ltr

The en banc petition is here.

The panel materials are here.

NCAI Release on Interior’s Carcieri Opinion

Here:

NCAI Encouraged By DOI Opinion On Carcieri;

Reaffirms Need For A Robust Fix That Ensures Tribal Equality

WASHINGTON, DC – The National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) appreciates the efforts of the Department of the Interior in issuing a new legal opinion and working to provide further guidance in defining the tribes “under federal jurisdiction” as of 1934 in the wake of the Supreme Court’s 2009 Carcieri v. Salazar decision regarding the Indian Reorganization Act. The opinion, however, highlights the need for Congress to make clear that all Indian tribes are under federal constitutional authority to regulate.

The Indian Reorganization Act was enacted in 1934 to restore Indian tribal governments and tribal lands after the failed federal policies of termination and assimilation. The Act ensured that the tribal way of life would continue and thrive. In its Carcieri decision, the Supreme Court determined that the Secretary of the Interior does not have authority to take land into trust for tribes that were not “under federal jurisdiction” prior to 1934. However, the Court did not define what it means for a tribe to have been “under federal jurisdiction” as of the enactment of the IRA.

According to the DOI opinion, M-37029, the term “under federal jurisdiction” is ambiguous and undefined, therefore the DOI has the authority to determine which tribes do and do not fall under the statute and will proceed to make decisions about trust agreements accordingly. In previous legal work, NCAI has taken the view that the Constitution devotes authority in Indian affairs to the federal government and that the only question is whether an Indian tribe exists, as in the Supreme Court’s decision in U.S. v. Sandoval in 1913.

Of the opinion, NCAI President Brian Cladoosby stated:

 

“NCAI is pleased the Department of the Interior has addressed one of the many problems created by the unclear and damaging language in the Carcieri decision. It is encouraging to see a federal agency work to strengthen the trust relationship – particularly the DOI, as one of their fundamental tasks is fulfilling the United States’ trust responsibility to tribal nations.

 

The opinion is encouraging, but Carcieri still stands. Tribes need a permanent, legislative solution and NCAI will continue to work towards a clean Carcieri fix. All tribes must be treated equally but as long as Carcieri is upheld, that is not possible and that is unacceptable.”

 

The Carcieri decision has affected all tribes – even those “under federal jurisdiction” as of 1934. Processing delays in trust land applications, additional bureaucratic red tape for potential economic investors, and confusion over legal jurisdiction are just a few of the consequences.

More importantly, the decision is a direct attack on tribal sovereignty. Indian trust land is the foundation of tribal economies and the only real federal protection of tribal authority from state and local governments.

NCAI is committed to the preservation of tribal sovereignty and ensuring a robust nation-to-nation between tribes and the federal government. We will continue to support and work with tribal leaders to advance these priorities.

Interior Opinion on Meaning of “Under Federal Jurisdiction”

Here:

DOI Carcieri M opinion – M 37029

Here is the link to Interior opinions.

Order Approving Oneida/NYS Settlement Agreement and Dismissing Interventions — UPDATED

Here is the order approving the settlement agreement between the Oneida Indian Nation and the State of New York, and dismissing both the Cayuga Nation and Stockbridge-Munsee Community’s motions for intervention.

UPDATE — briefs are here:

280-2 Cayuga Motion to Intervene

288 Oneida Response to CN Motion

289 Interior Response to CN Motion

290 NY Response to CN Motion

293 Cayuga Reply

300 MJ R&R Recommending Grant of CN Motion

303-1 Stockbridge-Munsee Motion to Intervene

312 NY Plaintiffs Objection to R&R

313 Oneida Objection to R&R

319 Settlement and Stipulation

326 NY Plaintiffs Response to SMC Motion

327 Oneida Response to SMC Motion

329 Interior Response to SMC Motion

332 Stockbridge Munsee Reply

344 Interior ROD Amendment

Ninth Circuit Affirms Rule 19 Dismissal in Friends of Amador County v. Jewell

Here is the unpublished opinion. An excerpt:

The district court concluded next that joinder would not be feasible because the Tribe enjoys sovereign immunity as a federally recognized Indian tribe. Appellants challenge the validity of the Tribe’s federally recognized status but concede its existence. Indeed, the Tribe has been federally recognized since at least 1985, see Indian Tribal Entities Recognized and Eligible to Receive Services, 50 Fed. Reg. 6055-02 (Feb. 13, 1985), and it thus has “the immunities and privileges available to other federally acknowledged Indian tribes by virtue of their government-to-government relationship with the United States,” Indian Entities Recognized and Eligible to Receive Services from the Board of Indian Affairs, 77 Fed. Reg. 47,868-01 (Aug. 10, 2012).

Briefs and link to oral argument audio here.

Lower court materials here.

Interior Board of Indian Appeals Rejects Cherokee Nation’s Challenge to BIA Trust Acquisition for United Keetoowah Band

Here is the opinion:

Cherokee Nation v Acting Eastern Oklahoma Regional Director BIA

News coverage here.

Village of Hobart v. Oneida Tribe of Wisconsin Cert Petition

Here:

Hobart Cert Petition

Questions presented:

1) Whether Congress’ waiver of the federal government’s sovereign immunity, under § 313(a) of the CWA, for enforcement of local stormwater management ordinances, for “any property” over which it has “jurisdiction,” applies to land taken into trust pursuant to 25 U.S.C. § 465.
2) Whether lands acquired by an Indian tribe pursuant to 25 U.S.C. § 465, within its former reservation boundaries are, removed from state jurisdiction because, as the Seventh Circuit ruled, they are reclassified as “Indian Country.”

Lower court materials here.

Written Testimony in SCIA Hearing on Carcieri

Here:

Assistant Secretary Assumes Jurisdiction over Appeals of Fee to Trust Acquisitions over 200 Acres

Here:

11 12 13-F2TDecisions IBIA-Washburn PDF0NJ

Final Rule: Patchak Patch

Here:

11-13-13 Patchak_Final Rule

Press release:

11-12-13 PR Land Into Trust Procedures

Excerpt:

“This rule provides greater certainty to tribes in their ability to develop lands acquired in trust for purposes such as housing, schools and economic development,” said Assistant Secretary Washburn. “For such acquisitions, the rule will create a ‘speak now or forever hold your peace moment’ in the land-into-trust process. If parties do not appeal the decision within the administrative appeal period, tribes will have the certainty and peace of mind to begin development without fear that the decision will be later overturned.”