Here:
Foreword: Diversity in the Legal Academy After Fisher II
Intersectional Barriers to Tenure
Race, Cognitive Biases, and the Power of Law Student Teaching Evaluations
Echoes of Slavery II: How Slavery’s Legacy Distorts Democracy
The Power of Imagination: Diversity and the Education of Lawyers and Judges
Grant Christensen (The University of North Dakota) and Melissa L. Tatum (University of Arizona – James E. Rogers College of Law) have posted “Reading Indian Law: Evaluating Thirty Years of Indian Law Scholarship,” forthcoming in the Tulsa Law Review.
Here is the abstract:
This article surveys thirty years of law review articles and compiles a formal ranking system to create a list of the 100 most influential Indian law scholarly pieces from the last thirty years. As Indian law has grown from a niche field offered by a couple schools to a robust legal discipline it is now impossible for the thousands of professors, students, practitioners, and judges to identify the most important pieces published each year. This piece, with its first of its kind approach to ranking Indian law scholarship, has the potential to not only highlight other important works but to become an article that is itself the focus of conversation.
Judge Gregory Bigler has posted “Traditional Jurisprudence and Protection of Our Society: A Jurisgenerative Tail” on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
This paper is an exercise in self-discipline organizing thoughts from a long period of work and life that explores some of what uniquely guides traditional Euchee and Muscogee society. I use my participation in traditional Euchee ceremonial life as a lens with which to view tribal, federal and human rights law and processes. By so doing I hope to begin articulating a modern traditional Indian jurisprudence and find some source(s) to aid in preservation of native society. In order to truly reform federal Indian law not only must traditional tribal jurisprudence be acknowledged, but the processes used by ceremonial people must be understood, and utilized, in a transformative effort. While I am informed by discussions with friends from other tribes who hold similar beliefs to my Euchee people, however, I write from the perspective of a Polecat Euchee ceremonial stomp ground member. I believe the validity of my observations depends on the discussions being tribal specific, meaning I do not simply refer to “Indian” traditions but rather to Euchee, Muscogee, Shawnee, etc., traditions. Such traditional jurisprudence must be a foundation of the current international indigenous rights efforts regarding sacred sites and artifacts, religious practices and culture if those efforts are to have meaning. If Indian advocates are unable to articulate what we believe and the nature of the society being destroyed it is more difficult to argue for its’ continuity. Perhaps more importantly, we must be able to explain to ourselves what we believe, teaching our own people and incorporating those beliefs into our own tribal institutions thus continuing (or creating) a social-legal system that can carry us into the future. I hope the process I explore herein will also be of interest to my friends and colleagues exploring federal Indian law and international human rights.
HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!
Identifying dangerous persons across jurisdictions can help prevent needless tragedies. Keeping firearms away from persons who are legally prohibited from purchasing firearms requires collaboration across many jurisdictions—including tribal governments. NCAI will be hosting a webinar on NICS, featuring a presentation from JoAnn Garrison, Liaison Specialist from the FBI NICS Business Unit. The webinar will provide an overview of NICS and the ten federal firearm prohibitions, and then explain how tribes can access and use NICS to protect tribal citizens form illegal gun possession. The discussion will primarily focus on the two federal prohibitions specific to domestic violence: the Misdemeanor Crime of Domestic Violence federal prohibition, 922(g)(9), and the Protection Order federal prohibition, 922(g)(8). Attendees will gain knowledge of the role they play in sharing information needed to determine if a firearm transfer is disqualified under federal law as well as highlight the importance of sharing record information on a national level.
–You can register for the webinar here.–
The webinar will be recorded if you are not able to join. If you have any questions, please contact: Elizabeth Reese, erese@ncai.org.
Andrew Rome has published “Black Snake on the Periphery: The Dakota Access Pipeline and Tribal Jurisdictional Sovereignty” in the North Dakota Law Review.
Here:
Volume 43, Issue 4 (2017)
“Animals May Take Pity on Us”: Using Traditional Tribal Beliefs to Address Animal Abuse and Family Violence Within Tribal Nations
Sarah Deer and Liz Murphy
Affirming a Pragmatic Development of Tribal Jurisprudential Principles
Todd R. Matha
Traditional Problems: How Tribal Same-Sex Marriage Bans Threaten Tribal Sovereignty
Marcia Zug
Close to Zero: The Reliance on Minimum Blood Quantum Requirements to Eliminate Tribal Citizenship in the Allotment Acts and the Post-Adoptive Couple Challenges to the Constitutionality of ICWA
Abi Fain and Mary Kathryn Nagle
Carla Fredericks, Kathleen Finn, Erica Gajda and Jesse Heibel have posted “Responsible Resource Development: A Strategic Plan to Consider Social and Cultural Impacts of Tribal Extractive Industry Development,” forthcoming in the Harvard Journal of Gender and Law.
Here is the abstract:
This paper presents a strategic, solution-based plan as a companion to our recent article, Responsible Resource Development and Prevention of Sex Trafficking: Safeguarding Native Women and Children on the Fort Berthold Reservation, 40 HARV. J.L. GENDER 1. (2017). As a second phase of our work to combat the issues of human trafficking and attendant drug abuse on the Mandan, Hidatsa and Arikara Nation (MHA Nation), we developed a strategic plan to better understand the time, scale, and capacity necessary to address the rising social problems accompanying the boom of oil and gas development there. During our process, we discovered, through multiple engagements with tribes, that similar negative impacts of rapid economic development are occurring throughout the United States. In particular, many tribes are deeply concerned about the rapid increase in human trafficking on and near their reservations coincident with the entrance or re-entrance of the extractive industries.
The paper is a generalized strategic plan for tribes and other stakeholders to consider in combating the social impacts of extractive industry development. Although the plan is designed to be universal in scope and aspires to assist tribes throughout the country, it does not purport to take into account the unique complexities of individual Indian communities. The history, values, and research are examined to develop a process that will best suit a Native approach to each of the solutions presented, informed foremost by our relationship with the tribal community on Fort Berthold, as well as other tribes nationally. A cornerstone of the plan is that services that center on cultural identity and draw upon family connections are a preferred approach for Native peoples. Further, any approach to trafficking of Native women and children must take account of the colonial genesis of trafficking, generational trauma, and other risk factors.
Michalyn Steele has posted “Congressional Power and Sovereignty in Indian Affairs” on SSRN. The paper is forthcoming in the Utah Law Review.
Here is the abstract:
The doctrine of inherent tribal sovereignty — that tribes retain aboriginal sovereign governing power over people and territory — is under perpetual assault. Despite two centuries of precedential foundation, the doctrine must be defended afresh with each attack. Opponents of the doctrine of tribal sovereignty express skepticism of the doctrine, suggesting that tribal sovereignty is a nullity because it is not unfettered. Some pay lip service to the doctrine while undermining tribes in their exercise of inherent sovereignty. Underlying many of these legal fights is confusion about both the nature of tribal sovereignty and the justifications for its continuing existence. Under current federal law, tribes are domestic, rather than international sovereigns. Tribes retain significant powers but are subject to the ultimate sovereignty of the United States. The sui generis status of Indian tribes in the American legal landscape generates important and difficult questions: which governing powers do tribes retain and where does the power to answer that question reside in the federal system? How are disputes about the scope of tribal authority to be resolved?
As the debate about what powers tribes may exercise (and over whom) continues into its third century, it is critical to reexamine the origins of the doctrine of inherent tribal sovereignty as a settled principle of federal law and to articulate the principles that ought to guide the development of that principle in the future. Setting the metes and bounds of the doctrine of tribal sovereignty in federal law and policy belongs to the political branches. This Article suggests legal principles that ought to guide the federal political branches in the exercise of the Indian Affairs power and the trust responsibility to address the scope of tribal inherent authority. First, this Article examines the legal roots and branches of the doctrine of inherent tribal sovereignty, demonstrating that the doctrine remains a vital principle of federal law. Second, this Article analyzes the nature of contemporary assaults on the doctrine of inherent tribal authority by all three branches of the federal government, states, and private actors. Third, this Article suggests principles that ought to guide Congress in exercising its Indian affairs power to clarify and affirm the bounds of tribal sovereignty in federal law and in carrying out the federal trust responsibility to tribes.
Highly recommended.
Here.
ICWA enhances protective factors by requiring court and agency compliance in child welfare proceedings with two cutting-edge provisions: active efforts and placement preferences. Congress deliberately created a higher standard for Indian child welfare proceedings requiring state agencies to provide active efforts to AI/AN families compared to non-Indian proceedings – which require use of reasonable efforts. Active efforts are defined as “affirmative, active, thorough, and timely efforts intended primarily to maintain or reunite an Indian child with his or her family.”15, 17
The National Native American Bar Association (NNABA) Foundation is excited to announce the second year of its Bar Review Scholarship Program. NNABA Foundation will award at least ten (10) $1,500 scholarships.
To advance our mission to foster the development of Native American lawyers, the NNABA Foundation Board of Directors established this Scholarship Program to help Native American law students offset bar review course/program expenses. The Bar Prep Scholarships were made possible by the generous support of Walmart and NBCUniversal.
The scholarship recipients will be honored at NNABA’s Annual Meeting, which will be held on April 4, 2018, at the Talking Stick Resort and Casino, Scottsdale, Arizona. More information and a copy of the NNABA Foundation Bar Review Scholarship application is attached and available HERE. The deadline to apply for these scholarships is March 2, 2018.
Please contact Lauren van Schilfgaarde lauren@tlpi.org or Colleen Lamarre colleen.lamarre@pillsburylaw.com with any questions regarding the scholarship. Thank you!
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.