Sixth Circuit Briefs in Sovereign Lending Case Involving Chippewa Cree Tribe

Here are the briefs in Swiger v. Rosette:

NAFOA Amicus Brief

Reply

Lower court materials in Swiger v. Rosette (E.D. Mich.):

Call for Presentations for NAICJA Annual Conference!

Call for Presentations_NAICJA-NationalConf_02-28-20_final

CALL FOR PRESENTATION PROPOSALS 2020

National Tribal Judicial and Court Personnel Conference Deadline:

Friday, April 10, 2020, 5:00 pm MST

Submission form: https://naicja.wufoo.com/forms/m10hpejn06xrvqf/

The National American Indian Court Judges Association (NAICJA) invites presentation proposals for the 51st Annual National Tribal Judicial and Court Personnel Conference to be held October 20-23, 2020, at the Radisson Hotel and Conference Center in Green Bay, Wisconsin. NAICJA’s Annual Conference offers innovative and timely tribal justice information through high quality presentations by national experts. This is your opportunity to share your expertise and display your creativity by developing an original program for presentation. Proposals specifically tailored to meet the needs of the 300-person NAICJA audience are strongly preferred.

North Carolina SCT Decides Indian Status in Criminal Jurisdiction Case

Here are the materials in State v. Nobles:

opinion.pdf

appellant-brief.pdf

appellee-brief.pdf

reply.pdf

Lower court materials here.

UC Davis Tribal Justice Symposium: Protecting Families Through Tribal Courts

The Tribal Justice Project Presents: Tribal Justice Symposium: Protecting Families Through Tribal Courts!

Tribal court judges, court personnel, practitioners, community members, and students are invited to attend this FREE event. Space is limited, please RSVP today!

Date: March 13, 2020

Location: UC Davis School of Law – Davis, CA

Fee: No Registration Fee

Click here to register.

For questions, please contact tjp@law.ucdavis.edu.

Flyer (PDF):

Tribal Justice Symposium Flyer and Agenda_Page_1Tribal Justice Symposium Flyer and Agenda_Page_2

Red Cliff Ojibwe Appellate Court Rejects Nonmember Challenge to Tribal Jurisdiction

Here are the materials in Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians v. CenturyTel of the Midwest – Kendall, LLC:

PLD 2020-02-04 Final Decision

Briefs here.

New Fletcher Paper: “The Rise and Fall of the Ogemakaan”

Please check out my new paper, “The Rise and Fall of the Ogemakaan,” now available on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

Anishinaabe (Odawa, Bodewadmi, and Ojibwe) legal and political philosophy is buried under the infrastructure of modern self-determination law and policy. Modern Anishinaabe tribes are rough copies of American governments. The Anishinaabeg (people) usually choose their ogemaag (leaders) through an at-large election process that infects tribal politics with individualized self-interest. Those elected leaders, what I call ogemaakaan (artificial leaders) preside over modern governments that encourage hierarchy, political opportunism, and tyranny of the majority. While modern tribal governments are extraordinary successes compared to the era of total federal control, a significant number of tribes face intractable political disputes that can traced to the philosophical disconnect from culture and tradition.

Anishinaabe philosophy prioritizes ogemaag who are deferential and serve as leaders only for limited purposes and times. Ogemaag are true representatives who act only when and how instructed to do so by their constituents. Their decisions are rooted in cultural and traditional philosophies, including for example Mino-Bimaadiziwin (the act of living a good life), Inawendewin (relational accountability), Niizhwaaswii Mishomis/Nokomis Kinoomaagewinawaan (the Seven Gifts the Grandfathers or Grandmothers), and the Dodemaag (clans). I offer suggestions on how modern tribal government structures can be lightly modified to restore much of this philosophy.

Cool Pro Hac Update from Ho-Chunk Nation

HCN has updated their own tribal rules of civil procedure to allow for a pro hac waiver in tribal court for child welfare cases:

(C) Counsel not admitted to practice before the Ho-Chunk Nation Courts, but seeking to appear on behalf of a federally recognized Indian tribe in a proceeding regarding a petition for guardianship or for child protection over a child who is a member of that tribe, or eligible for membership in that tribe, shall be permitted to appear without paying any fee. Counsel representing an Indian tribe in such a matter shall also be permitted to make their appearance without filing a motion for special appearance, provided that, at that appearance, said counsel states on the record that they are admitted to practice in another state, federal, or tribal jurisdiction; that they have been in actual practice for two or more years, and takes the oath or affirmation for practice. This rule shall not apply to attorneys who appear on behalf of the Ho-Chunk Nation.

HCN Civ. Pro. R. 16(c)

We’ve updated the pro hac page accordingly.  Obviously these are not ICWA pro hac waivers, but are related and can be used to show comity in this area.

North Dakota SCT Affirms State Court Jurisdiction over Reservation Housing Eviction Matter

Here is the opinion in Gustafson v. Poitra: Opinion

Excerpt:

Linus and Raymond Poitra appeal the district court judgment of eviction. The Poitras argue the district court erred by exercising jurisdiction over this matter, and by sending a North Dakota law enforcement officer onto the reservation to evict tribal members from property within the Turtle Mountain Reservation. We affirm.

Briefs:

Appellant Brief

Appellee Brief

Wolters Kluwer (Aspen) Publishes Second Edition of Fletcher’s American Indian Tribal Law

Website here.

Federal Court Rejects Immunity Defense to Nonmember Challenge to Tribal Jurisdiction

Here are the materials in Big Horn County Elec. Coop. v. Big Man (D. Mont.):

79 Tribal Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings

80 Response

81 Reply in Support of 79

83-4 Plaintiff Motion for Summary Judgment

85 Big Man Motion for Summary Judgment

88 Tribal Board Motion for Summary Judgment

97 Magistrate Report

98 DCT Order Denying 79

Prior post here.