Greg Bigler on Traditional Jurisprudence

Judge Gregory Bigler has posted “Traditional Jurisprudence and Protection of Our Society: A Jurisgenerative Tail” on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

This paper is an exercise in self-discipline organizing thoughts from a long period of work and life that explores some of what uniquely guides traditional Euchee and Muscogee society. I use my participation in traditional Euchee ceremonial life as a lens with which to view tribal, federal and human rights law and processes. By so doing I hope to begin articulating a modern traditional Indian jurisprudence and find some source(s) to aid in preservation of native society. In order to truly reform federal Indian law not only must traditional tribal jurisprudence be acknowledged, but the processes used by ceremonial people must be understood, and utilized, in a transformative effort. While I am informed by discussions with friends from other tribes who hold similar beliefs to my Euchee people, however, I write from the perspective of a Polecat Euchee ceremonial stomp ground member. I believe the validity of my observations depends on the discussions being tribal specific, meaning I do not simply refer to “Indian” traditions but rather to Euchee, Muscogee, Shawnee, etc., traditions. Such traditional jurisprudence must be a foundation of the current international indigenous rights efforts regarding sacred sites and artifacts, religious practices and culture if those efforts are to have meaning. If Indian advocates are unable to articulate what we believe and the nature of the society being destroyed it is more difficult to argue for its’ continuity. Perhaps more importantly, we must be able to explain to ourselves what we believe, teaching our own people and incorporating those beliefs into our own tribal institutions thus continuing (or creating) a social-legal system that can carry us into the future. I hope the process I explore herein will also be of interest to my friends and colleagues exploring federal Indian law and international human rights.

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!

Ninth Circuit Oral Argument Video in Rabang v. Kelly [Nooksack]

Here.

Briefs here.

Federal Court Rejects Habeas Petition Seeking Vacature of Major Crimes Act Domestic Violence Conviction [Hualapai]

Here are the materials in Smith v. United States (D. Ariz.):

1 Motion to Vacate

8 US Response

13 Reply

14 Magistrate Report

15 Objection

17 DCT Order

Grand Traverse Band RFP: Healing to Wellness Court Evaluator

Here:

2018.02.19 RFP Evaluator (final)

SCOTUS Denies Cert in ICWA and Tribal Jurisdiction Matters

Here is today’s order list. The Court denied cert in Renteria v. Superior Court & Norton v. Ute Indian Tribe.

Federal Court Stays Becker v. Ute to Await Tribal Court Rulings

Here are the materials in Becker v. Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation (D. Utah):

70 Becker Motion for PI

73 Ute Motion for Summary Judgment [preemption]

74 Ute Motion for Summary Judgment [illegality]

75 Ute Emergency Motion for TRO

84 Becker Opposition

86 Ute Opposition

88 Reply in Support of 75

91 Becker Reply

93 Ute Surreply

101 Ute Motion to Reassign Case

102 DCt Chief Judge Order re 101

103:

Discussion and argument heard on the motions. After taking a recess, and for the reasons stated on the record, the court made the following rulings on the record: 
The court DENIES 70 Mr. Becker’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction; 
DENIES 71 Motion for Leave to File Sealed Document; 
DENIES 75 The Tribe’s Motion for TRO, Motion for Preliminary Injunction, and Motion for Permanent Injunction; and 
GRANTS 93 Tribe’s Motion for Leave to File Sur-Reply. 

The court also stays the case and all remaining pending motions (Dkt. Nos. 72, 73 and 74). Should the tribal court decline jurisdiction, the court will then address the remaining motions. The parties are granted leave to file a motion to lift the stay if circumstances should change before resolution of both the tribal court and state court actions. 

Prior posts here.

Draft Guidance on the Native American Children’s Safety Act

Here is the Dear Tribal Leader letter, the guidance, and the request for comments on it:  Draft Guidance for NACSA

This bill and guidance puts certain requirements on tribes, tribal courts, and tribal social service agencies regarding foster care placements and background checks. There have been concerns about the feasibility of the requirements, primarily related to tribal access to individual state databases for the required checks. Here are the important listening session and comment dates (I have to assume that’s March 16, 2018, not 2017 for the written comment deadline):

Federal Court Dismisses Challenge to Tribal Court Marriage Dissolution Proceeding [UPDATED]

Here are the materials in LaForge v. Gets Down (D. Mont.):

12 Morton Motion to Dismiss

21 Tribal Judges Motion to Dismiss

26 Order to Show Cause

27 Morton Response

28 Tribal Judges Response

29 LaForge Brief

30 Magistrate Report

31 Tribal Judges Objection

33 DCT Order

Update [6/26/2018]

31 Motion to File Evidence

34 Response

35 Magistrate Report

36 DCT Order

Federal Court Dismisses Ute Tribal Jurisdiction Challenge on Mootness Grounds

Here are the materials in Charles v. Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation (D. Utah):

16 motion to dismiss

23 hackford opposition

25 reply

44 motion to dismiss [mootness]

45 hackford opp

47 other defendants opposition

48 reply

60 dct order

Federal Court Stays Nooksack RICO Case Pending DOI Election Investigation

Here is the order in the matter of Rabang et al v. Kelly et al, 17-cv-00088 (W.D. Wash.):

Doc. 140 – Order

At plaintiff’s request, the court has extended a stay of the proceedings until April 30, 2018. It is awaiting the BIA’s final determination regarding the validity of the Nooksack’s 2017 general election.