tribal courts

Grant Christensen on Tribal Court Civil Jurisdiction

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Grant Christensen has posted, “Creating Brightline Rules for Tribal Court Jurisdiction Over Non-Indians: The Case of Trespass to Real Property,” on SSRN (abstract only). It is forthcoming in the American Indian Law Review.

Here is the abstract:

The 2010 passage of the Tribal Law and Order Act will invest significantly more resources in tribal courts. As tribal courts expand, conflicts between sovereignties – tribal, state, and federal – are likely to occur with much greater frequency. Tribal court civil jurisdiction over non-Indians will be among the issues most frequently appealed into federal courts. I offer this piece to propose a new and novel solution; that tribal courts be extended civil jurisdiction in a piecemeal process that vests absolute tribal court jurisdiction over non-Indians for those civil offenses over which tribes have the greatest interest. This article takes one of the most common jurisdictional questions, tribal court jurisdiction over non-Indians in cases of trespass to land, and argues that a bright-line rule favoring tribal court jurisdiction in this instance is legally mandated, will pragmatically conserve judicial resources, and recognizes the broad tribal sovereignty recently reaffirmed by Congress.

U.S. v. Medearis — Tribal Search Warrant Valid under Federal Law

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in this case that details the interaction of tribal (Rosebud Sioux, in this case) and federal criminal procedure rules, holding that FRCrimPro 41 is inapplicable to tribal law enforcement officers when investigating alleged violations of tribal criminal law.

Magistrate R&R — Medearis

Medearis Objection to Magistrate R&R

DCT Order re Motion to Suppress

SCOTUSBlog Petition of the Day: Miccosukee v. Kraus-Anderson

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here. Interesting petition, if for no other reason than the respondent supports the petition (!!!).

Title: Miccosukee Tribe v. Kraus-Anderson Construction Co.
Docket: 10-717
Issue(s): Whether an action to obtain recognition of an Indian tribal court judgment presents a federal question under 28 U.S.C. § 1331.

Certiorari-Stage Documents:

 
ETA-the petition was listed as a petition to watch by SCOTUSblog on 1/20 because it will likely be considered by the Justices at their 1/21 conference.

 

Rogers-Dial v. Rincon Band Complaint

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Interesting case, involving the right of a tribe to evict non-Indians from tribal lands. The complaint, with a tribal court opinion attachment, is here: Rogers-Dial Complaint & Motion for PI

Conn. Dram Shop Action against Mohegan Settles; Some Briefs Available

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

According to Indianz, the Mohegan Tribe settled this matter (VanStaen-Holland v. Lavigne), which was to be argued before the Connecticut Supreme Court today.

Some of the briefs are available, and worth reading:

Mohegan Brief

Connecticut Amicus Brief

U.S. v. Shavanaux — Government’s Brief on Appeal Where Indictment Dismissed Based on Reliance on Tribal Court Convictions

Matthew L.M. Fletcher4 Comments

Interesting, and a case to watch. The government is attempting to prove a recidivist element of the crime (domestic violence) through use of two or more uncounseled tribal court convictions. Lower court materials here.

Here is the opening brief: US Appellant Brief in Shavanaux.

Navajo Nation Supreme Court Rejects Application for Attorney Fees for Party Challenging Election Reducing Size of Navajo Council

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Very interesting opinion (available here).

The court’s syllabus:

In the attorney fee phase of this appeal of the Office of Hearing and Appeals’ dismissal, the Supreme Court invalidates the appropriation of public funds to pay attorney fees in this case and the use of a “grant agreement” for attorney payment; and places a moratorium on Navajo Nation discretionary spending through direct disbursement “financial assistance” programs until a statutory and regulatory basis is in place in compliance with Navajo Nation fiduciary laws.

Non-Indian Business Concurs in Miccosukee Tribe Cert Petition over Enforcement of Tribal Court Judgments

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Very surprising! It is exceptionally rare for a private, non-Indian respondent that has won below to file a brief in support of a tribal cert petition.

Here is the brief: Kraus-Anderson Brief in Support of Petition

And the petition, with link to lower court materials.

API v. Sac and Fox Reply Brief in Support of Cert Petition

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here: API Reply.

The petition (No. 10-613) is up for discussion in the Conference of Jan. 14, 2011.

Muscogee Judicial System “in Limbo”

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the article.

An excerpt:

The judicial system of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation is in limbo.

At its Nov. 20 regular meeting, the tribe’s National Council overrode a veto by Principal Chief A.D. Ellis and approved a bill that abolished the tribe’s district court and replaced it with three courts.

Each of the new courts focuses solely on one legal area, with one for criminal cases, one for civil cases and one for family cases. The tribe’s Supreme Court was not affected by the legislation.

National Council Speaker Roger Barnett said, “We had some concerns about people getting proper assistance in specific areas, so specific courts were established for those areas.”

Ellis had vetoed the bill Nov. 10, claiming that it violated the separation of powers clause in the tribe’s constitution. The council voted 20-5 to override the veto.

So far, no judges have been seated to oversee the new courts. Barnett said the Chief’s Office has 60 days from the legislation’s passage to make nominations or the council will do it.

In response to the legislation, Ellis sued the National Council in the tribe’s district court.

Continue reading →