Here are the new materials in Rabang v. Kelly (W.D. Wash.):
03-20-18 Letter From Bob Kelly and Notice of Involuntary Disenrollement
144 3-15-18 Kelly Defendants’ Motion for Indicative Ruling Regarding Dismissal
UPDATE (4/11/18) — motion denied
4-11-18 Order Denying Defendants’ Rule 62.1 Motion For Indicative Ruling Regarding Dismissal
Here.
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!
Troy A. Eid and DeAnna Goldtooth have published “’Children Are Sacred’: Applying Navajo (Dine’) Fundamental Law to Strengthen Juvenile Justice” at 62 The University of South Dakota Law Review 728 (2017). The draft manuscript is here.
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe (Tribe) is now accepting Proposals from qualified individuals, organizations or firms for the development of a Children’s Code for the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s Code of Justice. The Tribe currently has a Children’s Code but the current version is in need of revision to reflect changes in the law and current practices.
The successful Proposal should reflect experience working with Tribes and Tribal Courts. Experience in Code drafting and development, knowledge of the issues facing Children’s Courts, knowledge of the law as it pertains to Abuse and Neglect proceedings, Delinquency, Status offenses, Indian Child Welfare proceedings, Custody, Termination and Adoptions issues/ proceedings and Title IVE requirements. The Tribe also seeks to implement traditions and customs where applicable or necessary.
Requested Information: A) Cover Letter B) Outline of Experience working with: (1) Abuse & Neglect cases; and, (2) Title IV(e). C) Two (2) years minimum experience in each case type is recommended but not required. D) Whether the Bidder is Tribal or Indian Owned. Copies of tribal identification cards must be included to support the statement. Indian owned is defined as any business that is at least fifty-one percent (51%) owned by an individual who is an enrolled member of a federally recognized tribe; E) detailed breakdown of cost(s) of preparation; and, F) References.
Deadline for submission is January 19, 2018 at 4:00pm CST. The Tribe reserves the right to select, any bid or no bid. Proposals should be submitted in PDF format via email to: dagard@standingrock.org. Sealed proposals will be received in person at SRST Tribal Court, c/o Melvin White Eagle Building, 101 Agency Avenue, Fort Yates, ND 58538 or mailed to SRST Court, P.O. Box 363 Fort Yates, ND 58538, Attn. D. Agard, Court Administrator.
William R. Norman Jr., Kirke Kickingbird, and Adam P. Bailey have published “Tribal Disenrollment Demands a Tribal Answer” in the ABA Human Rights Journal.
Here is the opinion in Coeur d’Alene Tribe v. Johnson. (PDF)
An excerpt:
Here, the Johnsons assert that the Tribal Court is dominated by the Tribe. They point to the tribal law stating that the Tribe has jurisdiction over the river and to the amount of the fine imposed against them. As discussed above, the Johnsons have failed to show that the Tribe does not have jurisdiction over the bed of the St. Joe River adjoining their property. Further, while the fine was large, it was only one-fifth of that authorized by the tribal code. CTC 44-24.01 (authorizing a fine of $500 per day for unlicensed encroachments). We hold that the Johnsons have failed to show that the Tribal Court was biased.
Further, the Johnsons had more than sufficient notice and opportunity to be heard in the Tribal Court. The record shows the Johnsons were informed of the proceedings on four occasions before default judgment was entered. Despite this, they elected to simply ignore the proceedings in Tribal Court. The Johnsons were not denied due process.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.