tribal courts – Page 74

Tribal Title IV-E Consultation Calls with Children’s Bureau

February 18, 2016Kate Fort

Via NICWA

Children’s Bureau to Host Tribal Consultations

Title IV-E Conference Calls Scheduled for March 8th and 10th

On February 12, 2016, the Children’s Bureau of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services announced two tribal consultation calls regarding a new round of Title IV-E Foster Care program development grants. Title IV-E funds placement activities related to foster care, relative guardianship, adoption, and independent living services.

This consultation opportunity comes after a 2015 General Accountability Office study of tribes’ experiences in developing a Title IV-E Foster Care program. NICWA strongly encourages any tribe that has an interest in the program to participate in the consultation or submit written comments. Tribal members are encouraged to forward this announcement on to their tribal leaders to help publicize this opportunity.

See the GAO report here.

There have been fewer than expected tribes participating in the program to date. The consultations will provide interested tribes with information on the Title IV-E program and a chance to share their concerns or questions regarding Title IV-E and the development grants.

The bureau will hold tribal consultation calls to discuss this opportunity on two dates:

Tuesday, March 8, 2016 (11:00 am PT; 2:00 pm ET)
Thursday, March 10, 2016 (11:00 am PT; 2:00 pm ET)

The call-in number for both consultation calls is: 1-888-220-3087, Passcode: 8699239

Eighth Circuit Affirms Indian Country Habitual DV Offender Conviction

February 16, 2016Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opinion in United States v. Harlan.

Federal Court Dismisses ICRA Habeas Petition for Failure to Exhaust

February 15, 2016February 15, 2016Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the order in Steward v. Mescalero Apache Tribal Court (D. N.M.):

7 DCT Order

Colorado River Indian Tribes Associate Judge Posting

February 11, 2016Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

ASSOCIATE.JUDGE.ANNOUNCEMENT

John LaVelle on United States v. Bryant

February 10, 2016Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is “‘Uncounseled’ convictions a threat to Indians.”

United States v. Bryant Background Materials

February 8, 2016March 18, 2016Matthew L.M. Fletcher4 Comments

Merits Stage Briefs:

Brief for the United States

NCAI Amicus Brief

NIWRC Amicus Brief

Former US Attys Amicus Brief

Respondent’s Brief

Brief of Amici Curiae Criminal Justice Organizations and Scholars

Brief Amici Curiae of Professor Barbara L. Creel and the Tribal Defender Network

Brief Amici Curiae of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and Experienced Tribal Court Criminal Litigators

Cert Stage Briefs:

Cert Petition

NCAI Amicus Brief in Support

Opposition Brief

US Cert Stage Reply

Lower court briefs (en banc stage):

CA9 Order Denying En Banc Petition + Opinions

US En Banc Petition

NCAI Amicus Brief

Bryant Response

Lower court briefs (panel):

CA9 opinion in United States v. Bryant

Bryant Opening Brief

US Brief

Bryant Reply Brief

Bryant Supplemental Brief

US Supplemental Brief

Order Denying Kelsey Petition for Rehearing en Banc

February 8, 2016Sarah M Donnelly

Download order here.

Link to previously posted en Banc petition here.

Fletcher & Jurss: “Tribal Jurisdiction – A Historical Bargain”

February 3, 2016February 3, 2016Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Matthew Fletcher and Leah Jurss have posted “Tribal Jurisdiction — A Historical Bargain” on SSRN.

Here is the abstract:

The existing rhetoric surrounding tribal civil jurisdiction over non-Indians often leaves out the historical foundations to that jurisdiction. This article compares the tribal economies of the 18th and 19th centuries with the current environment of gaming and economic development on tribal lands. Though non-Indians and nonmembers occasionally object to tribal jurisdiction, the long history of tribal governance and economic regulation demonstrates that nonmembers have received and continue to receive the benefit of a bargain that places them under considerable tribal regulation in exchange for access to tribal markets.

Through a detailed survey of treaties, tribal statutes, and federal laws covering pre-1970’s tribal economic regulation, this article reveals that non-Indians have continually consented to tribal jurisdiction to access these tribal markets, making outliers of the non-Indians attempting to access tribal markets without consenting to tribal market regulations. Analyzing the laws surrounding the federal and tribal licensing of Indian traders; the Great Lakes fur trade; the marriage laws of the Five Civilized Tribes; and the procedures established for dealing with intruders on Indian lands in the 18th and 19th centuries demonstrates the vast historical underpinnings of the current efforts to retain civil jurisdiction over non-Indians.

This is a work in progress, and so as usual we would be delighted for helpful constructive criticism. Miigwetch!

Fourth Circuit Rules against Western Sky et al.

February 3, 2016Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opinion in Hayes v. Delbert Services Corp. (4th Cir.).

An excerpt:

We both respect and appreciate the support of Congress and the Supreme Court for an arbitration procedure that reduces the costs and delays of civil litigation. Our review of the record leads us to conclude, however, that the arbitration agreement in this case is unenforceable. The agreement purportedly fashions a system of alternative dispute resolution while simultaneously rendering that system all but impotent through a categorical rejection of the requirements of state and federal law. The FAA does not protect the sort of arbitration agreement that unambiguously forbids an arbitrator from even applying the applicable law. We therefore reverse the district court’s order compelling arbitration and remand for further proceedings.

Briefs here.