tribal courts

Draft Guidance on the Native American Children’s Safety Act

February 12, 2018Kate Fort

Here is the Dear Tribal Leader letter, the guidance, and the request for comments on it: Draft Guidance for NACSA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

February 12, 2018June 27, 2018Matthew L.M. Fletcher

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

January 31, 2018January 31, 2018Matthew L.M. Fletcher

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

January 29, 2018Sarah M Donnelly

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.

138 DCT Order

An excerpt:

Oklahoma is among the states with the highest number of opioid prescriptions per one hundred people and has a high overdose death rate. Tribal communities have been tragically affected, as have other communities in Oklahoma. Numerous cities, counties and states throughout the country, including the state of Oklahoma, have filed lawsuits against various opioid manufactures, pharmaceutical distributors, and other businesses allegedly responsible for the proliferation of opioid drugs. This proceeding concerns a lawsuit by the Cherokee Nation against a number of opioid distributors and pharmacies. However, the question before the Court is not the merits of the Cherokee Nation’s lawsuit but rather the boundaries of tribal court jurisdiction. The Attorney General of the Cherokee Nation has filed suit not in state court but in the tribal district court of the Cherokee Nation. Do the tribal courts of the Cherokee Nation have jurisdiction over this particular action? The Court finds they do not.

Briefs here.

Ninth Circuit Briefs in Coeur d’Alene Tribe v. Hawks

January 2, 2018January 2, 2018Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Opening brief

Appellee brief

Lower court materials here.

Turtle Talk

Draft Guidance on the Native American Children’s Safety Act

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

Federal Court Dismisses Ute Tribal Jurisdiction Challenge on Mootness Grounds

Federal Court Stays Nooksack RICO Case Pending DOI Election Investigation

Jim Diamond on Practicing Indian Law in Federal, State, and Tribal Criminal Courts

Nottawaseppi Huron Band Potawatomi Supreme Court Pics (Sparty in the House)

Todd Hembree Commentary in EdWeek about the Cherokee Opioid Matter

Eid & Goldtooth on Navajo Juvenile Justice Law

Federal Court Enjoins Cherokee Nation Tribal Court Suit against Opioid Companies

Ninth Circuit Briefs in Coeur d’Alene Tribe v. Hawks