From the Soo Tribe website:
The trial court’s grant of partial summary judgment in favor of the Tribe is here: Opinion — Feb. 9, 2007
The docket sheet in the Michigan Court of Appeals is here. One appellant brief was filed in September. Meter, Owens, and Borrello are the assigned judges.
Justice Michael Cavanagh, the Michigan Supreme Court’s liaison with Michigan’s tribal courts, is speaking before the members of the Michigan Indian Judicial Association this morning.
Justice Cavanagh, along with Tribal Judge Michael Petoskey, spearheaded the Court’s adoption of Michigan Court Rule 2.615, extending comity to tribal court judgments.
Justice Cavanagh wrote about the origins of the rule in an article published in the University of Detroit Law Review. Download Justice Cavanagh’s Article.
Tribal courts from numerous tribes appeared at this talk today at the MSU College of Law: Nottawaseppi Huron Band of Potawatomi Indians, Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians, Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians, Little River Band of Ottawa Indians, Bay Mills Indian Community, Keweenaw Bay Indian Community, Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe.
Justice Michael F. Cavanagh
Justice Cavanagh received a bachelor’s degree from the University of Detroit in 1962 and his law degree from the University of Detroit Law School in 1966. He began his career as a law clerk for the Michigan Court of Appeals. In 1967, Justice Cavanagh was hired as an assistant city attorney for the City of Lansing and thereafter was appointed as Lansing City Attorney, serving until 1969. He then became a partner in the Lansing law firm of Farhat, Burns and Story, P.C. In 1971, he was elected judge of the 54-A District Court. Justice Cavanagh was then elected to the Michigan Court of Appeals, where he served from 1975-1982. At that time, he was the youngest person ever elected to the Michigan Court of Appeals. Justice Cavanagh was elected to the state Supreme Court in 1982 and was re-elected in 1990, 1998, and 2006. He served as Chief Justice from 1991-95. Justice Cavanagh’s current term expires January 1, 2015.
The son of a factory worker and a teacher who moved to Detroit from Canada, Justice Cavanagh worked on Great Lakes freighters during the summers to help pay his tuition at the University of Detroit. During his years in law school, he was employed as an insurance claims adjuster and also worked for the Wayne County Friend of the Court as an investigator.
Justice Cavanagh has participated in numerous community and professional activities, including Chairman of the Board of the American Heart Association, Past President of the Incorporated Society of Irish/American Lawyers, Board of Directors of the Thomas M. Cooley Law School, and the Commission on the Future of the University of Detroit Mercy . He is a Member of the Institute of Judicial Administration, New York University Law School. He has served as Vice President of the Conference of Chief Justices, Chair of the National Interbranch Conference of Funding the State Courts, and member of the National Center for State Courts Court Improvement Program. Other appointments include the Michigan Justice Project, Chairman of the Judicial Planning Committee, Michigan Crime Commission, Judicial Coordinating Committee, and Chair of the Sentencing Guidelines Committee. Justice Cavanagh is the Supervising Justice of the Michigan Judicial Institute. Justice Cavanagh was instrumental in the planning, design, construction and eventual completion of the Michigan Hall of Justice. He has served as Supreme Court Liaison, Michigan Indian Tribal Courts/Michigan State Courts since 1990, and has attended many national Indian Law conferences and participated in Federal Bar Association Tribal Court symposiums.
Justice Cavanagh and his wife, Patricia, are the parents of three children, and have two grandsons. The Cavanagh family resides in East Lansing .
From the Petoskey News Review:
Allied EMS emergency medical technician
Chris Heckman (left) and paramedic Erik Slifka are shown with an ambulance and heart monitor purchased with assistance from the Emmet County Local Revenue Sharing Board.
Revenue-sharing grants have helped Allied acquire seven ambulances as well as assorted equipment for the vehicles through the years. “They’ve been very instrumental in helping us keep our operation going,” said Allied chief executive officer Dave Slifka. (Ryan Bentley/News-Review)
Deciding how the community will share in Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians casino proceeds is not a game of chance.
Under its gaming compact with Michigan, the Odawa tribe is required to provide 2 percent of electronic gaming receipts from its Petoskey casino to nearby communities. The Local Revenue Sharing Board, a three-member appointed panel, is responsible for choosing specifically what projects and resources will receive support, reviewing grant applications twice yearly to decide which requests merit awards.
“We’re servants of the public,” said revenue board chairman Les Atchison. “We’re trying to do the best we can in our judgment to see that the money is put to best use. Frankly, we welcome the suggestions of those who appoint us.”
From its inception in 2000 through the end of 2006, the board awarded about $6 million in grants funded with casino proceeds. Since the tribe’s casino site is in federal trust status and not subject to property taxes, the board paid an additional $540,000 to local governments during those years to make up for tax revenue they would have received if the property was on the tax rolls.
From the Petoskey News Review:
“Four weeks after the various governments reached an understanding of how historic treaty rights apply to tribal members’ inland fishing and hunting activities, many of their officials and staff — about 100 people in all — gathered at the Odawa Hotel in Petoskey to commemorate the new agreement.
“Pipe and flag ceremonies and a gift exchange among governmental leaders were part of the celebration.
“It is a pretty exciting day,” said Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians tribal chairman Frank Ettawageshik.
“While driving to Thursday’s event, Ettawageshik noted that he’d passed through some heavy fog before arriving in clearer conditions — and likened this experience to the years-long discussion and negotiation that led up to the agreement.
“Here we are back in the sunshine at the end of the clouds,” the chairman said.
Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians tribal chairman Frank Ettawageshik signs a document commemorating a new consent decree which clarifies the hunting and fishing rights retained by five of Michigan’s Indian tribes in the Treaty of 1836. The LTBB hosted a celebration to commemorate the new agreement Thursday at its Odawa Hotel. (Ryan Bentley/News-Review)
From the Detroit News:
“In this tranquil beach community, the gentle lapping waves of Lake Michigan have brought ashore a brutish dispute.
Sports fishermen and charter boat operators are fighting a local American Indian tribe over its use of fishing nets in one of the top salmon spots in the nation.
The issue has led to vandalism, boycotts and charges of favoritism and racism. Some boaters refer to the town as Manisteepee.
‘It’s racial,” said Matt Stone, 28, an American Indian netter who has been called racist names. “I know it. I feel it. I see it. I hear it.'”
Jacque Leblanc hauls in chubs near Manistee. Fishermen and boat operations are at odds with a local Indian tribe over use of nets. (John L. Russell / Special to The Detroit News)
As part of the Michigan State Law Review Symposium, The Great Lakes Compact, we (Profs. Singel & Fletcher) published a short paper, “Indian Treaties and the Survival of the Great Lakes.” The paper and symposium are now online.
Other authors include without limitation Jim Olson, Austen Parrish, Dan Tarlock, and Mark Squillace. Check it out.
I have been tracking media coverage of the 2007 Consent Decree and have been pleased to see that most reporting on the issue has been balanced and reasonable. It is well documented that media coverage of topics related to American Indians and Indian affairs has been unbalanced and has had impacts on both public perception and policy making. Media coverage of Indian issues is critical because the majority of the general public has little to no direct contact with American Indians or tribal officials and news reports therefore serve as a primary influence on public perceptions of these issues (Jarding, Social Science Journal 2004). Local and regional newspapers around the state, including those in Ludington, Escanaba and Sault Ste. Marie, continue to provide coverage of this topic and their journalists are providing very professional and informative articles.
Furthermore, the recent news reports have given us a sense for the Michigan Department of Natural Resources’ public discussions of the 2007 Consent Decree and I am pleased to see their level of professionalism and balanced presentation of the topic. Unfortunately I have not yet made it to any of the MDNR’s public meetings, but it seems based on the media coverage that the MDNR is doing a stand-up job of leading these important discussions. I hope the MDNR’s productive public discussion on the Consent Decree is a sign that they are willing to work in an intergovernmental fashion with the 1836 tribes to co-manage fish, wildlife and ecosystems in the Ceded Territory in the future.
Lastly, I recently reviewed materials posted on the MUCC website regarding the 2007 Consent Decree and was again, very excited to see balanced and useful information that shows an understanding of treaty law and is respectful to Indian people and tribal resource rights.
It appears we have learned some important lessons from past experiences of treaty negotiations regarding resource use and management in and out of Michigan. If the 1836 tribes, the MDNR, federal agencies and other key partners can work together cooperatively, there is no doubt we can build on respective strengths and improve ecological and socio-economic conditions in the region over time.
From the Ludington Daily News: “Chris Dobyns of the Michigan Attorney General’s office explained that several legal precedents were in the tribes’ favor heading into the negotiation on inland rights. The Canons of Construction, which are long-standing legal guidelines, explain that any ambiguous language in a treaty like “until the land is needed for settlement,” should be construed liberally in favor of tribes. Court rulings against the state of Minnesota and Wisconsin have reinforced this.”
More from the Ludington Daily News: “What will most residents notice once the new tribal consent decree kicks in? Nothing different, according to Little River Band Natural Resources Commission Chair Jimmie Mitchell, who spoke to the Daily News shortly after the agreement was announced.”
From the Battle Creek Enquirer:
WMU helps museum identify human remnants as Native American
Professors from Western Michigan University identified human remains in the Kingman Museum collection to be those of Native Americans on Tuesday.
Anthropologist professors and several students inspected 11 boxes of remains, scalps and cultural artifacts at the museum’s request.
The museum was complying with the Native American Grave Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), which federally regulates that institutions identify and return certain Native American cultural items to lineal descendants or culturally affiliated Indian tribes.
The Michigan Anishnaabek Cultural Preservation and Repatriation Alliance (MACPRA), which represents the state’s federally recognized and historic Indian tribes, asked that Kingman identify the unknown remains.
The bones came from as nearby as Coldwater Avenue in Battle Creek and as far as the Grand Canyon and Peru. Remains found in Alaska and near Muskegon were deemed to be those of several Native Americans and the others were either unidentifiable or purchased through medical companies.
Here’s the National NAGPRA site.
Here’s the full text of the statute.
Your humble blogger will be giving a talk at the University of Michigan Law School (co-sponsored, I understand, by the U-M NALSA and the Michigan Journal of Race & Law) on November 12, 2007 at 12:20 PM in Room 150 of Hutchins Hall.
My talk will be called, “Factbound and Splitless: The Impact of the Certiorari Process on Federal Indian Law.”
Here’s the blurb I gave the students on this talk:
I have reviewed each of the 144 Indian law-related cert petitions filed in the Supreme Court from the 1986 to 1993 Terms. Tribal interests began losing 75 percent of their cases in the Court starting in 1987, a significantly worse win rate than even convicted criminal petitioners. I argue that the critical factors the Court looks for in deciding whether to grant cert — “circuit splits,” cases of national “importance,” and cases that are not “factbound” — create structural (and yet wholly discretionary) barriers to the vindication of tribal interests in Supreme Court adjudication.
If you want to read the documents I’ve read in this study, check out the Digital Archive of the Papers of Harry A. Blackmun. And bring your docket numbers, because that’s how it’s organized.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.