Here are the materials in Caddo Nation of Oklahoma v. Court of Indian Offenses for the Anadarko Agency (W.D. Okla.):
Tribal Codes
N. Carolina COA Affirms Conviction Obtained under State-Tribal Cross-Deputization Agreement
Here are the materials in State v. Kostick (N.C. App.):
An excerpt:
Pursuant to the Tribal Code of the Eastern Band of the Cherokee Indians and mutual compact agreements between the Tribe and other law enforcement agencies, the North Carolina Highway Patrol has authority to patrol and enforce the motor vehicle laws of North Carolina within the Qualla boundary of the Tribe, including authority to arrest non-Indians who commit criminal offenses on the Cherokee reservation. Our State courts have jurisdiction over the criminal offense of driving while impaired committed by a non-Indian, even where the offense and subsequent arrest occur within the Qualla boundary of the Cherokee reservation.
Nooksack COA Strikes Down Disenrollment Procedures
Howard Brown and Ray Austin Update Article on Navajo Preference in Employment Act
Howard L. Brown and the Honorable Raymond D. Austin have published “The Navajo Preference in Employment Act: A Review and Update of Cases and Rules, 2010–2012” in the New Mexico Law Review.
The original article from 2010 is here.
Three Tribes Approved for VAWA Jurisdictional Pilot Project
Press release here (pdf) and here.
Details here.
WASHINGTON – Three American Indian tribes – the Pascua Yaqui Tribe of Arizona, the Tulalip Tribes of Washington, and the Umatilla Tribes of Oregon – will be the first in the nation to exercise special criminal jurisdiction over certain crimes of domestic and dating violence, regardless of the defendant’s Indian or non-Indian status, under a pilot project authorized by the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013 (VAWA 2013).
Update in Roberts v. Kelly — Nooksack Disenrollment Appeal
Navajo SCT Rules against Navajo Member in Employment Suit with BHP Bilton/New Mexico Coal Co.
Here is the opinion in Jones v. BHP Bilton/New Mexico Coal Co.:
Nooksack Tribal Court Materials on Disenrollees Motion for Contempt
Here are the new materials in St. Germaine v. Kelly (Nooksack Tribal Court):
St Germain v. Kelly Motion for Order to Show Cause Re Contempt
St Germain v. Kelly Declaration of Leah Zapata
St. Germain v. Kelly Declaration of Agripina Smith
St. Germain v. Kelly Response to Plaintiffs Motion of Ord to Show Cause Re Contempt
Previous materials in this case are here and here.
Nooksack COA Rules against Nooksack Disenrollees
Here is the opinion in Lomeli v. Kelly (Nooksack App.):
An excerpt:
This appeal is from the Tribal Com1’s order dismissing Appellants· second amended complaint. Appellants requested the Tribal Court enjoin members of the Nooksack Tribal Council from conducting disenrollment proceedings against them. Appellants are understandably gravely concemed at the prospect of disenrollment. We understand how serious the prospect of disenrollment is to Appellants. and how it impacts their cultural. social and political identity.
We also recognize that determining its own membership is a hallmark of a tribe’s sovereignty. It is one of the few aspects of tribal sovereignty that has withstood the relentless attempts by outside forces to tear down tribal self-governance, and one of the few aspects of tribal sovereignty that has not been eroded by the federal government.
Judges are not sages. We do not delude ourselves into believing we have the wisdom of a Solomon. It is not our role to insert ourselves into the Tribe’s political fray. or second guess the political judgments made by the Tribe’s elected leaders or its voting members, even if we believe those judgments unwise. We, like the trial court. are limited to resolving legal questions where authorized by the Tribe’s Constitution and laws.
The nature of this dispute requires us to find the delicate balance between Nooksack lawand politics keeping in mind the equal importance attached to both Tribal membership and Tribal sovereignty. The Tribe’s Constitution guides us in this difficult task. which we are duty bound to perform.
The Nooksack judiciary is not the only Nooksack governmental body whose decisions are tethered to the Tribe’s Constitution and laws. The decisions of its elected officials are as well. The trial judge expressed it well and it is worth repeating:
The Tribal Council members named in this Complaint hold an obligation to act in the best interests of the Nooksack Indian Tribe. Membership and enrollment decisions impact individual lives in the deepest possible ways and those decisions cannot be taken lightly. This Cotut recognizes the serious implications of this case and its decision on this motion and all the others that have preceded it. It is the solemn obligation of this Court to follow the law of the Nooksack Indian Tribe and it is the obligation of the Tribal Council to do the same.
Lower court materials are here.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.