“The Three Lives of Mamengwaa: Toward an Indigenous Canon of Construction” Article Now Published By Yale

Here.

Abstract:

For too long, tribal judiciaries have been an afterthought in the story of tribal self-determination. Until the last half-century, many tribal nations relied on federally administered courts or had no court systems at all. As tribal nations continue to develop their law-enforcement and police powers, tribal justice systems now play a critical role in tribal self-determination. But because tribal codes and constitutions tend to borrow extensively from federal and state law, tribal judges find themselves forced to apply and enforce laws that are poor cultural fits for Indian communities—an unfortunate reality that hampers tribal judges’ ability to regulate and improve tribal governance.

Even where tribal legislatures leave room for tribal judges to apply tribal customary law, the results are haphazard at best. This Article surveys a sample of tribal-court decisions that have used customary law to regulate tribal governance. Tribal judges have interpreted customary law when it is expressly incorporated into tribal positive law, they have looked to customary law to provide substantive rules of decision, and they have relied on customary law as an interpretive tool. Reliance on customary law is ascendant, but still rare, in tribal courts.

Recognizing that Indian country will continue to rely on borrowed laws, and aiming to empower tribal courts to advance tribal governance, this Article proposes that tribal judges adopt an Indigenous canon of construction of tribal laws. Elevating a thirty-year-old taxonomy first articulated by Chief Justice Irvin in Stepetin v. Nisqually Indian Community, this Article recommends that tribal judges seek out and apply tribal customary law in cases where (1) the relevant doctrine arose in federal or state statutes or common law; (2) the tribal nation has not explicitly adopted federal or state law on a given issue in writing; (3) written tribal law was adopted or shifted as a result of the colonizer’s pressure and interests; and (4) tribal custom is inconsistent with the written tribal law, most especially if the law violates the relational philosophies of that tribal nation. Tribal judiciaries experienced at applying tribal customary law will be better positioned to do justice in Indian country.

Eleventh Circuit Reverses Anti-Tribal Lending Decision

Here are the materials in Dunn v. Global Trust Management LLC:

Lower court materials here.

Wonder what Uncle Brownie thinks. . . .

Cayuga Nation Citizen Sues Cayuga Nation to Avoid Tribal Jurisdiction

Here is the complaint in Parker v. Cayuga Nation (N.Y. Super.) [the case has been removed to federal court, but I don’t feel like looking up where, probably W.D. N.Y.]:

Prior post in this long slog of a dispute here.

Two Sault Tribe Chippewa Appellate Decisions on Election Matters

Here is the opinion in Payment v. Election Commission:

Here is the opinion in McRorie v. Election Commission:

Fort Sill Economic Development Authority Sues Fort Sill Business Committee in Federal Court

Here is the complaint in Economic Development Authority of the Fort Sill Chiricahua Warm Springs Apache Tribe v. Business Committee of the Fort Sill Chiricahua Warm Springs Apache Tribe (W.D. Okla.):

Ninth Circuit Decides Rincon Mushroom Company of America Inc. v. Mazzetti

Here is the unpublished opinion:

Lower court materials here.

New Student Scholarship on Tribal Trademark Law

Anthony Hernandez has published “Tribal Trademark Law” in the Stanford Law Review. Here is the abstract:

Native American tribes are increasingly creating their own intellectual and cultural property statutes. Of all the new legislation, tribal trademark law in particular is an engaging yet understudied area. By studying tribal trademark law, it becomes possible to evaluate the nature and scope of tribal sovereignty. And studying tribal trademark law provides an opportunity to consider how federal trademark law might incorporate tribal innovations. Situated at the intersection of tribal law, intellectual property, and tribal sovereignty, this Note asks whether the federal government is prepared to incorporate and recognize tribal trademark law in the same way that it has done for states’ laws.

Indiana Federal Court Orders Arbitration in Class Action Suit against Tribal Payday Lenders

Here are the materials in Walton v. Uprova Credit LLC (S.D. Ind.):

Washington Federal Court Remands Wage and Hour Claims against Tribal Member Owned Business to State Court

Here are the materials in Kwate v. Reece Construction Co. (W.D. Wash.):

New Mexico COA Affirms Order Requiring Polluter to Clean Up Reservation Dumping

Here is the opinion in New Mexico Environment Department Resource Protection Office v. HRV Hotel Partners LLC (N.M. Ct. App.):