The Regulatory Review [Penn.] Series: “Native Peoples, Tribal Sovereignty, and Regulation”

Here.

The description:

For the first time in U.S. history, a Native American will lead a cabinet-level department in the U.S. federal government. Secretary of the Interior Debra Haaland now heads the federal agency primarily responsible for coordinating the U.S. government’s complex regulatory relationships with Native Nations.

These relationships are predicated on tribal sovereignty—tribes’ inherent authority to “make their own laws and be governed by them.” Accordingly, the United States is obligated to promote tribal self-determination and tribes’ ability to provide for the health and welfare of tribal citizens within tribal lands. Yet despite its formal recognition of a certain degree of Native sovereignty, the federal government has also exercised significant control over tribal peoples and lands. Throughout U.S. history, federal administrative bodies, such as the U.S. Department of the Interior, have often failed to uphold the promises and obligations of sovereignty adequately.

In this series of essays, scholars and practitioners explore some of the most pressing regulatory issues affecting how Native American communities experience government and law, as well as how existing systems of power ignore and exclude Native peoples and governments.

The Regulatory Review is thrilled to feature this series of essays highlighting the effects that regulation has on Native individuals and communities. The series’ contributors include: Maggie Blackhawk, University of Pennsylvania Law School; Emily deLisle, University of Pennsylvania Law School; Katherine Florey, University of California, Davis School of Law; Dylan R. Hedden-Nicely, University of Idaho College of Law; Hillary M. Hoffmann, Vermont Law School; Aila Hoss, University of Tulsa College of Law; Sarah E. Krakoff, University of Colorado Law School; Elizabeth Kronk Warner, University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law; Sarah Roubidoux Lawson, Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC; Robert J. Miller, Arizona State University Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law;  Monte Mills, University of Montana Alexander Blewett III School of Law; Megan Powell, First American Title Insurance Company;  Ezra Rosser, American University Washington College of Law; Joe Sexton, Galanda Broadman PLLC; Judith A. Shapiro, Big Fire Law & Policy Group;  Jessica A. Shoemaker, University of Nebraska College of Law; and Ann E. Tweedy, University of South Dakota School of Law.

Tribes Sue EPA over Clean Water Act Rules

Here is the complaint in Pascua Yaqui Tribe v. EPA (D. Ariz.):

1 Complaint

Here is the complaint in Navajo Nation v. Wheeler (D. N.M.):

1 Complaint

Federal Court Enjoins HUD’s New National Down Payment Assistance Rule

Here are the materials in Cedar Band of Paiutes v. Department of Housing and Urban Development (D. Utah):

59-1-state-amicus-brief.pdf

69-hud-opposition.pdf

72-industry-amicus-brief.pdf

73-reply-in-support-of-motion-for-pi.pdf

News article explaining the injunction here.

We posted the complaint and the motion here.

Interior Starts Process to Undo Eagle Act Regulations to Allow Non-Indians to Access Eagle Feathers

Here is the notice:

2019-04-30 FR

An excerpt:

We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), have received a petition for rulemaking, which asks the Service to revise the existing rules pertaining to the religious use of federally protected bird feathers. The petition is being published pursuant to the terms of a settlement agreement entered into in 2016 by the United States with McAllen Grace Brethren Church and the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. Any changes to existing rules will be subject to a public comment period, and tribal consultation consistent with Executive Order 13175 and the Department of the Interior Policy on Consultation with Indian Tribes. The Service seeks comments on the petition.

“Waters of the United States” Comments by Michigan Tribal Interests

CORA, GTB, and Bay Mills comments on EPA’s proposal to change the definition of “Waters of the United States.”

Bay Mills-WOTUS Comments Regarding EPA-HQ-OW-2018-0149

CORA Comments WOTUS 2019

GTB 4-12-19 letter +map

Burt Lake & Interior Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment

Here are the materials in Burt Lake Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians v. Bernhardt (D.D.C.):

27-1 Burt Lake MSJ

30 DOI Cross Motion

32 Burt Lake Reply

34 US Reply

Prior posts here and here.