NICWA to Host Webinar on Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl

Date: Wednesday, February 13, 2013
Time: 11 a.m. Pacific / 2 p.m. Eastern
Presenter: Adrian Smith, JD, MSW, NICWA government affairs associate

The U.S. Supreme Court will soon hear the case Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl, a South Carolina adoption case involving the Indian Child Welfare Act. This high profile and emotionally charged case has garnered significant attention in the past year. Oral arguments are expected to occur in late April, and a decision announced shortly thereafter.

The National Indian Child Welfare Association will host a webinar for those interested in learning:

  • What are the background and facts of the case?
  • What are the questions before the U.S. Supreme Court?
  • What possible implications will this case have on Indian Country?
  • What is being done nationally in preparation for this hearing?

This free webinar is open to all. Register here.

Hat tip to NILL’s blog.

Andrew Cohen on SCT Voting Rights Case Amicus Briefs (and the Navajo Amicus Brief)

Here. An excerpt:

We tend to think of the mission of the Voting Rights Act as focusing exclusively upon the plight of black Americans. But the federal statute has been a grace note to Hispanic organizations and American Indians as well. National Latino groups filed a powerful brief with the justices. And the Navajo Nation filed an amicus brief in this case, and it is poignant for its reminder that while white Americans were discriminating against black Americans they also were discriminating against Native Americans. The Navajo Nation writes:

Indian people have endured a century of discrimination and overcome new obstacles each generation in order to exercise the right to vote in state and federal elections. Nowhere have these struggles been more prevalent than in the Section 5 covered jurisdictions of Apache, Navajo and Coconino Counties in Arizona the home of the Navajo Nation and Todd and Shannon Counties in South Dakota the home of the Rosebud and Oglala Sioux. The amici curiae file this brief to elucidate the importance that the Voting Rights Act and, in particular, Section 5 preclearance, has had in overcoming the purposeful efforts to disenfranchise Indian voters.

While passage of the Voting Rights Act in 1965 ended certain means of discrimination, Indians continued to be denied the right to vote through a variety of new strategies. As part of the 2006 reauthorization process, Congress obtained evidence that Indians continued to be disenfranchised by voting schemes, polling place discrimination and ineffective language assistance. The 2006 reauthorization was a legitimate Congressional response to the disenfranchisement. Protected by the Section 5 preclearance, voter registration and turnout have increased, but new challenges have arisen that require continued vigilance.

Complete Madison County v. Oneida Indian Nation Cert Stage Briefs

Here:

11-12-12 Madison v. NY Oneida Cert Petition

New York Amicus Brief in Support of Petition

Oneida Indian Nation of New York  Brief in Opposition

Madison County Cert Stage Reply Brief

Sen. Feinstein Letter re: Concerns about Interior’s New Policy on Trust Land Acquisition during Litigation

Here:

Sen. Feinstein Letter

C-SPAN: Angela Riley on “Native American Lands in the Supreme Court” before the Supreme Court Historical Society

From the website:

Angela Riley spoke in the Supreme Court chamber about the history of the Supreme Court and Native American lands. The lecture, which took place in the Supreme Court chamber, was one in a series hosted by the Supreme Court Historical Society on the Constitution, the Supreme Court, and property rights. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg introduced Professor Riley.

Video here.

NYTs Room for Debate on Baby Veronica Case

Here.

The debaters:

Kevin Noble Maillard

Terry Cross

Solangel Maldonado

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Joan Hollinger

Marcia Zug

Megan Lindsey

Supreme Court Denies Cert in One Indian Law Case — Pecore v. United States

Here is today’s order.

Our post on the Pecore cert petition is here.

Merits Briefs (so far) in Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc.

From the ABA:

Oneida Indian Nation Cert Opposition Brief in Reservation Boundaries Case

Here:

1-16-13 12-604 — Madison Countyv. Oneida Indian Nation of New York — S. Ct. Brief in Opposition-

Petition here.

 

Supreme Court’s Recent Floating Home Decision a Relief to Dockside Casinos

The WSJ reports here.

An excerpt:

Things that float aren’t always boats.

So says the Supreme Court, which used a Florida marina dispute to address an issue that has stirred the waters since the early days of the American republic.

The ruling is a relief for dockside-casino operators, which didn’t want their operations subjected to broader legal liability under maritime law.

The opinion in Lozman v. City of Riveria Beach is here. SCOTUSblog page here. SCT haiku version.