Federal Court Dismisses Slip and Fall Action against Fort Mojave Indian Tribe’s Casino Operations

Here are the materials in Ireson v. AVI Casino Enterprises (D. Nev.):

8 Motion to Dismiss

11 Response

16 Reply

21 DCT Order

Federal Court Dismisses Casino Patron Effort to Overrule Tribal Tort Claims Act Interpretation

Here are the materials in Wilson v. Umpqua Indian Development Corporation (D. Or.):

1 Complaint

1-7 Tribal Court Decision

15 Motion to Dismiss

Kansas Appellate Court Orders Resentencing of Kickapoo Tribal Member

Here is the opinion in State v. Horselooking:

State v Horselooking

An excerpt:

Alvin P. Horselooking, Jr., appeals his sentence following his convictions of aggravated battery and driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI). The district court assigned Horselooking a criminal history score of B based in part on his Kickapoo Nation tribal conviction of residential burglary, which the district court scored as a person felony for criminal history purposes. However, the Kickapoo Nation Tribal Code does not designate burglary as being either a felony or a misdemeanor offense. As his sole issue on appeal, Horselooking claims the district court erred when it scored his prior Kickapoo tribal conviction as a felony for criminal history purposes. Because we agree with Horselooking’s claim, we vacate his sentence and remand for the district court to resentence Horselooking using the correct criminal history score.

Split Ninth Circuit Panel Finds Colorable Navajo Labor Commission Jurisdiction over Window Rock School District

Here is the opinion in Window Rock School District v. Nez.

An excerpt from the court’s syllabus:

The panel held that it was “colorable or plausible” that the tribal adjudicative forum, the Navajo Nation Labor Commission, had jurisdiction because the claims arose from conduct on tribal land over which the Navajo Nation had the right to exclude nonmembers, and the claims implicated no state criminal law enforcement interests. Well-established exhaustion principles therefore required that the tribal forum have the first opportunity to evaluate its own jurisdiction, including the nature of the state and tribal interests involved.

Briefs and lower court materials here.

Washington COA Dismisses Two Challenges to Swinomish Civil Forfeiture under Rule 19

Here is the unpublished opinion in Washington v. Director of the Dept. of Licensing.

An excerpt:

After losing her vehicle to the Swinomish Tribe in civil forfeiture, Washington filed this suit against the Department of Licensing and unnamed Swinomish police officers. The trial court dismissed the case under CR 19 for failure to join an indispensable party: the Tribe. We affirm.

Here are the briefs:

And here is the unpublished opinion in Scott v. Doe.

Briefs:

“Enforcement of Tribal Protection Orders in California”

Here:

New Scholarship on Navajo Nation Car Buyers and the Subprime Lending Problem

Megan Horning has published “Border Town Bullies: The Bad Auto Deal and Subprime
Lending Problem Among Navajo Nation Car Buyers” in the National Lawyers Guild Review:

Horning Article

Federal Court Rules Against Burley Faction in California Miwok Dispute

Here are the materials in California Valley Miwok Tribe v. Zinke (E.D. Cal.):

44-1 Burley Motion for Summary J

46 US Cross-Motion

47 Dixie Cross-Motion

48 Burley Response

50 US Response

51 Dixie Response

53 Burley Reply

56 US Reply

57 Dixie Reply

60 DCT Order

Grand Ronde Independent Tribal Press Ordinance

Here:

Independent Tribal Press Ordinance 2016-12-28

News coverage: “Tribal Council appoints Editorial Board, OKs stipend

 

Continue reading

New Scholarship on Federal Restrictions on Tribal Customary Law

Concetta Tsosie de Haro has posted “Federal Restrictions on Tribal Customary Law: The Importance of Tribal Customary Law in Tribal Courts.” The paper was published in the Tribal Law Journal.

Here is the abstract:

This article examines the adverse effects of federal case law and legislation on tribal courts and tribal courts’ ability to incorporate tribal customary law. Tribal customary law is the law given to tribes by holy deities which governs tribal ways of life. It is important to maintain tribal customary law because it strengthens tribal communities’ identities and cultural foundations. While Supreme Court precedent has, at different times, both restricted and promoted tribes’ ability to use tribal customary law to adjudicate the cases of tribal members, federal legislation including the Major Crimes Act, the Indian Civil Rights Act, the Tribal Law and Order Act, and the Violence Against Women Act continues to restrict tribes’ ability to apply customary law in tribal courts. To illustrate one way in which current federal Indian policy limits tribes’ ability to use customary law, the author highlights the ways in which two-spirit tribal members are excluded and ignored by the protections established in the Violence against Women Act. As the use of tribal customary law is critical to the maintenance of tribal sovereignty, this article advocates for corrections to these legislative restrictions to promote tribal court’s use of tribal customary law.