The cert opp in MacArthur v. San Juan County is here — San Juan County Cert Opp
Our previous post with the cert petition is here.
Supreme Court
Commentary on the Plains Commerce Bank Cert Grant
The Supreme Court’s decision to grant certiorari in Plains Commerce Bank v. Long Family Land & Cattle Co. surprised me a great deal. It proves, I think, that Indian law scholars and practitioners cannot claim to predict how the Supreme Court is going to act (no big surprise there, given how few Indians or Indian lawyers have clerked for the Court), but I also think it shows that the so-called Supreme Court bar can miss one every now and then [SCOTUSBlog’s Petitions to Watch seemed to miss this one].
SCt Grants Cert in Plains Commerce Bank
The Supreme Court agreed to hear Plains Commerce Bank v. Long Family Land and Cattle Co. (No. 07-411). Here and here are our previous posts on this case that include the briefs and other materials. Here is the Court’s order. Opening briefs are due Feb. 14, response briefs due on March 12.
ICT Editorial on Cert Pool Memos & Indian Law
You can read my newest Indian Country Today editorial here or here.
Here’s the text:
Each year, the U.S. Supreme Court chooses which appeals it wishes to decide. In most years, the court decides to hear fewer than 80 cases out of several thousand appeals. These usually include cases in which there is a split of authority in lower courts (often called a ”circuit split,” referencing the 13 federal circuit courts of appeals), cases in which a lower court has committed a gross error or cases in which there is a critical constitutional issue at stake. Cases in which there is no split, cases that will affect only a few people, cases involving simple correction of a minor lower court error or cases involving an unimportant issue are unlikely to be heard by the court.
Paul Spruhan on Indian Blood Quantum under the IRA
Paul Spruhan, a clerk for the Navajo Nation Supreme Court, has posted “Indian as Race/Indian as Political Status: Implementation of the Half-Blood Requirement under the Indian Reorganization Act, 1934-1945” on SSRN. This paper was published in the Rutgers Race and the Law Review.
Here’s the abstract:
Reflections on Jonathan Lethem’s Essay “Defending The Searchers”
I recently read Jonathan Lethem’s essay from his book “The Disappointment Artist.” It’s the opening essay in this collection of self-reflective essays (nice way of saying navel-gazing, kind of like this blog).
My view of this essay is that it is part of the standard “liberal” or “enlightened” commentary about the horrors that have been visited upon the Indigenous peoples of this hemisphere and especially this continent. In other words — yes, we did the Indians wrong, but so what?
United States v. Killeaney — Sixth Amendment and the Dual Sovereignty Doctrine — A Circuit Split involving Tribal Law Enforcement & Tribal Courts?
The District Court for the District of South Dakota recently declined to suppress evidence obtained in a criminal investigation at the Rosebud. This case has the potential to go to the Supreme Court (a circuit split already exists and another could arise) and could be a significant problem for tribal criminal law enforcement.
The defendant allegedly committed a crime on tribal lands, initially investigated by the tribal police and prosecuted in tribal court. The defendant made statements to police while being represented by a tribal public defender, who was not a lawyer or a law school graduate (however, the director of the tribal public defender office is a lawyer). The US would like to use those statements in the federal prosecution of the same offense. The question is when the defendant’s Miranda and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel attaches. If the CA8 reverses this decision and holds that they attach at the tribal court level, then there will be two circuit splits.
Lost “Indian Law” Article by Justice Scalia
Kate Fort dug this up — it’s a Michigan Law Review article from then-Professor Scalia on federal sovereign immunity in the context of public lands cases, pre-APA. Most of the cases he discusses involving Indian lands. His aversion to federal common law is apparent at the end of the article.
Forthcoming Federal Lawyer Article: “The Supreme Court and the Rule of Law: Indian Law Case Studies”
It looks like I’ll have a short paper in the Federal Lawyer in the March/April 2008 issue they publish in conjunction with the FBA Indian Law Conference. This one is called “The Supreme Court and the Rule of Law: Indian Law Case Studies” and is based in part on my forthcoming Hastings Law Journal article, “The Supreme Court’s Indian Problem” (well, it’s sort of like outtakes from that article).
Here’s the abstract:
Andrew Jackson, the Cherokees & the Judgment Power
Ok, so earlier today I posted two articles back to back for a reason. They are (1) a light LA Times commentary on Andrew Jackson (okay dude or Hitler?); and (2) a dense law review article on the Article III judgment power by William Baude. They’re connected, in my opinion, although I doubt it is apparent to anyone but me.
Here it goes:
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.