Indian Country Fights to Protect Its Children and Preserve Its Sovereignty

New article from Nick Martin in The New Republic about the recent Brackeen v. Bernhardt decision and preserving ICWA. Available here.

First Nation Voting Rights: Planting for the future

When: September 25-27, 2019

Where: University of Utah School of Law

Press release and event flyer here. For more information on the conference you can visit the website.

Pinoville Pomo Nation Petition to Ninth Circuit to Halt Discovery Pending Appeal Fails

Here is the unpublished opinion in In re Pinoville Pomo Nation [Pinoville Gaming Authority v. United States District Court].

Here are the briefs:

Petition for Writ of Mandamus

Motion to Stay

Answer to Petition

Opposition to Motion for Stay

Reply

The appeal docs are here.

National Indian Law Library Bulletin (8/28/2019)

Here:

The National Indian Law Library added new content to the Indian Law Bulletins on 8/28/19.

Federal Courts Bulletin
https://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/federal/2019.html
Navajo Nation v. Department of the Interior (Indian Water Rights; Federal Trust Relationship)
Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians v. Whitmer (Treaty Rights; Reservation Diminishment)

U.S. Legislation – 116th Congress Bulletin
https://narf.org/nill/bulletins/legislation/116_uslegislation.html
The following bills were recently proposed in the House:
H.R.4188 – Native American Language Vitalization Act

Law Review & Bar Journal Bulletin (contact us if you need help finding a copy of an article)
https://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/lawreviews/2019.html

  • VAWA Reauthorization Act of 2013 and the continued legacy of violence against Indigenous women: A critical outsider jurisprudence perspective.
  • Michigan marijuana laws: Michigan tribes can participate, but how?
  • Partially tribal land: The case for limiting state eminent domain power under 25 USC 357.

News Bulletin
https://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/news/currentnews.html
This week, in brief:

  • U’s medical school in Duluth welcomes record number of Native students
  • Keystone Pipeline’s alternate route gets the go-ahead from Nebraska court
  • Wyoming lawmakers propose fix to allow tribal IDs for voter registration
  • Cherokee Nation picks representative for Congress, promised by US government nearly 200 years ago
  • New program gives remote Native American tribes greater access to affordable electric vehicles

Federal Court Affirms Yakama Reservation Boundaries

Here are the materials in Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation v. Klickitat County (E.D. Wash.):

1 Complaint

16 Motion to Dismiss

23 Response

24 Reply

25 DCT Order Denying Motion to Dismiss

36 Tribe Motion for PI

43 County Response

51 Reply

58 DCT Order Denying Motion for PI

76 US Amicus Brief

77 County Trial Brief

78 Yakama Trial Brief

86-1 Corrected US Amicus Brief

100 Washington Amicus Brief

112 DCT Order

Yakama PR

Osage Headright Owners’ Trust Breach Claims against US

Here is the complaint in Fletcher v. United States (Fed. Cl.):

1 Complaint

 

 

Swinomish/Quinault/Suquamish Amicus Brief in Climate Change Litigation in Washington State

Here is the brief in Aji P. v. State of Washington (Wash Ct. App.):

Tribal Amicus Brief

More details on this case here.

Federal Court Appoints Bob Yazzie and Troy Eid as Mediators in Barboan Trespass/Condemnation Action

Here is the order in Public Service Co. of New Mexico v. Approximately 15.49 Acres of Land in McKinley County (D.N.M.):

ORD Appting Co-Mdtrs (219)

Navajo Water Rights Trust Breach Case Dismissed

Here are the updated materials in Navajo Nation v. Dept. of the Interior (D. Arizona):

Third Amended Complaint materials

339 US Response

340 Utility and State Response

346 Navajo Reply

360-1 Navajo Renewed Motion

369 Utility and State Response

370 US Response

375 Navajo Reply

385 DCT Order

Prior posts here.

Sixth Circuit Affirms Tribal Court Decision in Spurr v. Pope

Decision

But our review involves no probing of the facts, just a pure question of law: Does a tribal court have jurisdiction under federal law to issue a civil personal protection order against a non-Indian and non-tribal member in matters arising in the Indian country of the Indian tribe? Because 18 U.S.C. § 2265(e) unambiguously grants tribal courts that power, and because tribal sovereign immunity requires us to dismiss this suit against two of the named defendants, we AFFIRM the district court’s dismissal of Spurr’s complaint.

Reply
Answer Brief
Appellant Brief

Lower court materials here.

Tribal supreme court decision here.

Update:

Cert Petition

Brief in Opposition