Here is the opinion in United States v. Johnson.
Tenth Circuit Affirms Restitution Award in Indian Country Manslaughter Case
Here is the opinion in United States v. Johnson.
Research
Tenth Circuit Opening Brief in Modoc v. Shah [tribal attorney immunity]
North Dakota Native Voting Rights Upheld by Supreme Court
On January 13, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the Walen v. Burgum redistricting lawsuit and affirmed the U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota decision that preserves North Dakota House District 4A, a subdistrict that gives Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara Nation voters a long-awaited opportunity to elect representatives of their choice. The lower court determined that state legislators were endeavoring to comply with Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and redistricting best practices by creating an election subdistrict along the boundaries of the MHA reservation as part of 2021 redistricting.
While the MHA Nation sided with the state to defend subdistrict 4A, North Dakota abandoned its own win during the appeal to the Supreme Court, failing to advocate for the state legislature’s voting map and citizens’ rights.
Susanville Indian Rancheria Sues IHS over Contract Support Costs
Here is the complaint in Susanville Indian Rancheria v. Beccera (E.D. Cal.):
Ninth Circuit Rules in Favor of Navajo Citizen in Relocation Costs Suit
Osage Nation Seeks to Relitigate Reservation Boundaries in Light of McGirt
Siletz Consent Decree and Restoration of Hunting and Fishing Rights
From Craig Dorsay:
After 44 years, the severe restrictions imposed on the exercise of hunting and fishing rights by the Siletz Tribe have been removed, and the Tribe is now free to claim and assert treaty rights as it sees fit. The original restrictions were imposed on the Tribe by the State of Oregon, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, as the price for the State not opposing Siletz’s restoration as a federally-recognized tribe in 1977 or obtaining a modest reservation in 1980. The State attorney at the time – this was in the middle of the Northwest treaty fishing wars -made sure these restrictions were ironclad and permanent by requiring the Siletz Tribe to enter into an Agreement on the exercise of hunting, fishing, trapping and gathering rights severely restricting those rights, and then incorporating that restrictive agreement in a “friendly” federal court decree as well as the Tribe’s federal legislation restoring a modest reservation for the Tribe. (copy of 1980 Agreement and federal court decree attached).
The State strictly enforced this Agreement until Governor Kate Brown in 2016 agreed that this Agreement and arrangement was unconscionable, and cooperated with the Tribe in getting it lifted. This cooperation resulted in federal legislation in 2023 removing the applicable reference from the Tribe’s Reservation Act, and in a November 2024 Court Order vacating the original 1980 federal court decree. A copy of the legislation, the joint motion to vacate the consent decree, and the Court Order are also attached.
Materials here:
Spokane Indian Bar CLE — 16th Annual
Navajo Sues for $25M Tribal Court Contract
Update in Yakama v. Toppenish [Tribal Shelter]
Here are pleadings so far in Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation v. City of Toppenish (E.D. Wash.):
15 Yakama Supplemental Response
20 City Supplemental Response to 1
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.