Here are materials from Peters v. Noonan (W.D. N.Y.):
Tribal Codes
Addendum to Report on Anti-Indian Movement in Skagit County, Wash.
Santa Clara Pueblo Votes to Change Membership Rules
Here.
New Report on Anti-Indianism in the Skagit County, WA GOP
Here’s a new report from Borderlands Research and Education, based in Silverdale, WA: Anti-Indianism in Skagit County – 4-15-2012 Having practiced in Skagit County, it’s good to see this sort of sentiment, which I found to be fairly prevalent, brought to light. I mentioned the State Republican Party’s resolution requesting termination of tribal sovereignty, which this report addresses in considerable detail, in one of my articles. See 13 U. Pa. J. Const. L. 737 n.239 (2011).
Dish Network Sues Hopi Revenue Agency to Avoid Business Registration/Tribal Court Jurisdiction
Here:
Paul Spruhan on Non-Indian Consent to Tribal Criminal Jurisdiction
Paul Spruhan has posted his draft paper, ‘Indians, in a Jurisdictional Sense’: The Continuing Viability of Consent as a Theory of Tribal Criminal Jurisdiction Over Non-Indians, on SSRN. We have accepted this paper for our new collection of essays to be edited by Fletcher, Fort, and Singel arising out of last fall’s MSU Indigenous Law and Policy Center annual conference, Beyond the Tribal Law and Order Act.
Here is Paul’s abstract:
The paper, written as a chapter for a proposed collaborative book on the Tribal Law and Order Act, discusses the theory of consent as a means of asserting tribal criminal jurisdiction over non-Indians. It discusses the legal history of naturalization and adoption of non-Indians as citizens of tribal nations as one form of consent. It then discusses the historical and contemporary influence of the Department of the Interior on tribal membership provisions adopted under the Indian Reorganization Act and other laws, and the shift from naturalization to rules restricting membership to citizens with tribal or Indian blood. It further discusses different modern theories of consent, adopted by the Navajo Nation and other tribes, based both on tribal traditional law and the Indian Civil Rights Act, and their relative chances of surviving federal scrutiny. It concludes with the proposal that non-Indians themselves consent to tribal criminal jurisdiction as a form of resistance to the ongoing reduction of tribal authority by the federal courts.
Federal Court Allows Pueblo of Santa Ana’s Challenge to N.M. Gaming Compact’s Jurisdiction Shifting Provisions to Proceed
Here are the materials in Pueblo of Santa Ana v. Nash (D. N.M.):
Party Defendants Motion to Dismiss
Here are the materials in the state supreme court decision that is the subject of this challenge.
Paul Spruhan on the Meaning of Due Process at Navajo
Paul Spruhan (Navajo DOJ) has posted his chapter, “The Meaning of Due Process in the Navajo Nation.” This is a chapter from “The Indian Civil Rights Act at Forty.”
Here is the abstract:
The article is a contribution to the Indian Civil Rights Act at Forty, and describes the Navajo Nation’s approach to the concept of due process under the Indian Civil Rights Act and the Navajo Bill of Rights. It traces the evolution of the Navajo Supreme Court’s views on due process from direct application of federal definitions to the development of a unique Navajo doctrine informed by federal constitutional doctrine, but ultimately reflecting Navajo values of fairness. Based on the discussion of the development of Navajo due process, the article suggests the Navajo Nation’s approach in synthesizing federal doctrine with tribal values can be a model for other tribes grappling with developing modern court systems that emphasize jurisprudential sovereignty through the development and application of unique tribal law.
Swinomish-Licensed Smokes Sellers Prevail (In Part) in the Ninth Circuit on CCTA Charges
Here are the materials in United States v. Wilbur:
CA9 Opinion (per Judge W. Fletcher, with partial dissent by Judge Rawlinson)
An excerpt:
For the reasons that follow, we agree with the Wilburs that during the period from 2003 to 2005, when they were licensed to sell tobacco by the Swinomish Tribe, there were no “applicable State or local cigarette taxes” under the CCTA. We also agree with the Wilburs that the five-year statute of limitations for CCTA violations bars any charges based on activity from 1999 to 2003. We conclude, however, that after their tribal tobacco license expired in 2005, the Wilburs’ activities ceased to be covered by the Swinomish cigarette tax contract (“CTC”), and that the state’s retrocession therefore ceased to apply. The unstamped cigarettes the Wilburs transported and sold during this period were thus “contraband” under the CCTA. We reject the Wilburs’ due process and treaty arguments.
Press Release from Wisconsin Judicare on their Indian Estate Planning Caravan
Wisconsin Judicare recently concluded its second annual Indian Wills Caravan. This innovative program was developed by Judicare’s Indian Law Office (ILO) and a group of law students at Columbia University School of Law. The students, for the second year running, devoted their Spring Break to coming to Wisconsin the week of March 12th to travel from one Indian reservation to another drafting wills for Native Americans. Supervised by an ILO attorney, the students this year drafted 157 wills addressing land fractionation and tribal jurisdictional issues, providing advice on intervivos transfers, and completed 195 Advance Directives.
The Indian Wills Caravan is very popular and is providing these legal services to Indian people in numbers far exceeding what Judicare can do on staff. This program would not be possible without the assistance of the Columbia Public Interest Law Foundation and support from the Law Firm of Godfrey and Kahn which is based in Milwaukee.
Contact: David Armstrong, Attorney Continue reading
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.