Here:
State of Michigan Amicus Brief
The other opening briefs are here.
Here.
Here.
Here.
Here are all of the materials now in the case consolidated as Cachil Dehe Band of Wintun Indians of Colusa Indian Community v. Salazar (E.D. Cal.) (we posted preliminary materials here):
Complaint here.
George Forman Affidavit in Spport of TRO
Consolidated Federal Opposition
Complaint here.
Enterprise denying TRO and Mandamus
Patchak is indistinguishable from the present case because no Plaintiff claims an interest in the Proposed Site, meaning that this is not a quiet title action and the QTA’s limitation on suits related to Indian lands does not apply. Patchak squarely addressed the supposedly irreparable harm that Plaintiffs complain of and indicated that federal district courts do have the power to strip the federal government of title to land taken into trust for an Indian tribe under the APA so long as the claimant does not assert an interest in the land. In this case, Plaintiffs only seek to divest the government of its title. They do not assert an interest in the Proposed Site. Plaintiffs have therefore not shown that the mere act of transferring the Proposed Site into trust on February 1, 2013 constitutes irreparable harm, and a TRO is therefore inappropriate.
Here are the materials in Stand Up for California! v. Dept. of Interior (D. D.C.):
Interior Motion to Change Venue
Interior Response to Picayune Memorandum
Here are the materials in Santana v. Muscogee (Creek) Nation:
Lower court materials here.
Here are the Tenth Circuit briefs so far in State of Oklahoma v. Hobia:
Brief Amicus Curiae State of NM (filed 1-25-13) (W1843673)
State of Michigan Amicus Brief
Filed Brief of the Appellee (1-25-13) (W1843503)
Lower court materials here.
Here are the materials so far in Rape v. Poarch Band of Creek Indians:
Update: Hildreth Motion for Leave to File Amicus [Escambia County]
The case arises from a jackpot claim at the tribal casino.
You must be logged in to post a comment.