Ryan Stoa on the Tribal Cannabis Agriculture

Ryan Stoa has posted “Tribal Cannabis Agriculture Law,” forthcoming in the Utah Law Review, on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

Indian tribes have some freedom to develop their own approach to cannabis agriculture, but what is the nature of that freedom, and how have tribes acted upon it? This Article investigates the current legal framework surrounding tribal cannabis agriculture and tribal participation in legal cannabis markets. It is generally believed that tribes have some freedom to determine the legality of cannabis cultivation on their lands, and to create rules and regulations governing that practice. However, this freedom is nascent and inconsistently granted by the federal government. In addition, the legal frameworks tribes are developing with respect to cannabis agriculture are still evolving and poorly understood, since each tribe is free to craft their own unique approach to the cannabis industry. This Article examines the current tribal cannabis agriculture landscape in several ways. First, a big-picture snapshot of the U.S. cannabis industry in 2023 is provided in order to place tribal cannabis policies in an appropriate context. Second, the Article attempts to discern the federal government’s opaque perspective on tribal cannabis law, including the contours of tribal freedom to self-regulate in this area. Third, the Article identifies trends and approaches to tribal cannabis agriculture that have emerged to date, with examples of cannabis policies from tribes around the country. Finally, a case study of the Hoopa Valley Tribe is presented in order to bring to life the legal complexities of this topic.

Minnesota Federal Court Dismisses Challenge to MCT Election

Here are the materials in LaRose v. Dept. of the Interior (D. Minn.):

Prior post here.

Litigation in North Dakota Federal Court over Turtle Mountain TERO Power to Assess Nonmember Business on Trust Lands

Here are the materials so far in Hanson v. Parisien (D.N.D.):

SCOTUS Denies Cert in Tribal Jurisdiction Case

Here is today’s order list.

The denied petition is Big Horn County Electric Cooperative Inc. v. Big Man.

Big Horn v. Big Man. Winner? Big Man.

Pawnee Nation Endorses Declaration on Rights of Indigenous Persons

Here is the press release and related statutes:

Angela Riley on Indigenous Cultural Property Law

Angela R. Riley has published “The Ascension of Indigenous Cultural Property Law” in the Michigan Law Review.

Prof. Riley presenting the paper last fall at ASU.

Here is the abstract:

Indigenous Peoples across the world are calling on nation-states to “decolonize” laws, structures, and institutions that negatively impact them. Though the claims are broad based, there is a growing global emphasis on issues pertaining to Indigenous Peoples’ cultural property and the harms of cultural appropriation, with calls for redress increasingly framed in the language of human rights. Over the last decade, Native people have actively fought to defend their cultural property. The Navajo Nation sued Urban Outfitters to stop the sale of “Navajo panties,” the Quileute Tribe sought to enjoin Nordstrom’s marketing of “Quileute Chokers,” and the descendants of Tasunke Witko battled to end production of “Crazy Horse Malt Liquor.” And today, Indigenous Peoples are fighting to preserve sacred ceremonies and religious practices at places like Standing Rock, Oak Flat, and Bear’s Ears. Though the claims range from “lands to brands,” these conflicts are connected by a common thread: they are all contemporary examples of Indigenous Peoples’ efforts to protect their cultural property. As issues surrounding cultural property play out on the global stage, there is a parallel movement underway within Indigenous communities themselves. More than fifteen years ago, in 2005, I conducted a comprehensive study of tribal law to understand what American Indian tribes were doing to protect their own cultural property within tribal legal systems. Since my original study, the ground around issues of cultural preservation and Indigenous rights—including the 2007 adoption of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, among others— have reignited interest in Indigenous Peoples’ own laws. Inspired by a convergence of global events impacting cultural rights, in 2020 and 2021, I set out to update my survey results and analyze the tribal cultural preservation systems and tribal laws of all 574 federally recognized American Indian tribes and Alaskan Native Villages in the United States. This Article reports those findings, situating the results in a human rights framework and leading to a core, central thesis: the data reveal a striking increase in the development of tribal cultural property laws, as Indian tribes seek to advance human and cultural rights in innovative and inspired ways. Indeed, in this Article, I contend we are witnessing a new jurisgenerative moment today in the cultural property arena, with tribal law already influencing decisionmakers at multiple ‘sites’—international, national, and subnational—in real time, with great potential for the future. To further demonstrate this phenomenon, I highlight the case study of the recent agreement to repatriate the Maaso Kova, a ceremonial deer head, from Sweden to the Yaqui peoples, and I also introduce several other examples where the seeds have been planted for the growth of the next jurisgenerative moment in Indigenous cultural property rights.

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!!!!

Utah Federal Court Orders Exhaustion of Tribal Remedies in Ute Banishment Case

Here are the new materials in Chegup v. Ute Indian Tribe of the Unitah and Ouray Indian Reservation (D. Utah), formerly Chegup v. Ute Indian Tribal Court of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation:

Tenth Circuit materials here. Earlier materials in the district court here.

Suit Filed to Challenge Montana Human Rights Commission’s Power to Enforce State Law Protections of Anti-Vaxxers in Indian Country

Here is the complaint in Glacier County Regional Port Authority v. Esau (D.Mont.):

New York Federal Court Declines to Enjoin Smoke Shops at Cayuga

Here is the order in Cayuga Nation v. Parker (N.D. N.Y.):

Akwesasne Notes, 1986

Prior post here.

Fletcher Reflections on Professionalism in Tribal Jurisdictions

Fletcher has posted “Reflections on Professionalism in Tribal Jurisdictions,” a short paper prepared for a special issue of the Michigan Bar Journal.

The abstract:

In this article, I will canvass several themes of professionalism in tribal practice, drawing my tribal law experience. Many lawyers to undervalue — even disrespect — tribal governance. This lack of professionalism has significant costs to tribal governments, tribal business, and their business partners.

Another irrelevant image.