The case is captioned Shomin v. Grand Traverse Band Election Board:
tribal election
Sault Tribe Membership Votes Down Romulus Casino; Chairman McCoy Promises Future Proposals
Here is the tribe’s press release. An excerpt:
The other referendum sought to repeal Resolution 2010-249, “Pursuit of Settlement of a Land Claim with respect to property in the Romulus, Michigan Metropolitan Area.”
The resolution was approved November 9 by the Sault Tribe board of directors.
The voters decided, by a vote of 1,864 to 2,986, to not approve Resolution 2010-249, thereby overturning the board’s action.
And:
Federal Court Claim re: Hopi Secretarial Election Stayed under Tribal Court Exhaustion Doctrine
Here are the materials in Sekayumptewa v. Salazar (D. Ariz.):
LVD Appellate Court Decision in Election Dispute
Here is the opinion in Pete v. Lac Vieux Desert Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians Tribal Council (Matha, J.):
Three Muscogee Supreme Court Justices Issue Opinion that Declares Opinion by Other Three Justices to be Void Ab Initio
Recall that in Muscogee (Creek) Nation Council v. Muscogee (Creek) Nation Election Board that three Justices purported to dismiss a claim relating to tribal constitutional amendments posted here on Saturday. Now the three other sitting Justices have declared that opinion void ab initio (opinion here: Response to Opinion and Order).
Muscogee Nation Council Challenge to Tribal Constitutional Amendment Thrown Out (without briefing)
A year ago, the Muscogee (Creek) Nation Council, along with a tribal member co-plaintiff, sued the Muscogee Election Board to challenge the adoption of several amendments to the tribal constitution, suing in the Muscogee (Creek) Nation Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction. That Court held, over a dissent, that it was improper to bring suit under the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction, and remanded the case to the district court. The district court judge recused, leaving a vacancy that was never filled by the Muscogee executive branch. The case languished, and now the Muscogee (Creek) Nation Supreme Court (3-2, with one Justice not participating) has dismissed the claims for lack of standing of the plaintiffs, apparently without notice to the parties or the benefit of briefing of either party on the questions of whether it could reassert jurisdiction or on the standing of the parties.
Here are the materials:
Muscogee Council & Robert Trepp Complaint // CV 09-211 Summons & Complaint signed
Supreme Court Order Remanding to DCT
District Court Judge Recusement
Supreme Court Order Dismissing Suit // Supreme Court Order Dismissing Suit complete opinion
Briefs in Cherokee Nation Redistricting Case
The opinion in Cowan-Watts v. Smith is here.
Here are the available briefs:
Cherokee Nation Supreme Court Strikes Down Redistricting Plan
Here is the opinion in Cowan-Watts v. Smith: Cherokee Nation election case.
An excerpt:
The Court FINDS that the portion of the Legislative Act 22-10 purporting to create a district with a 22.8% deviation in representation is hereby determined to be unconstitutional. This Court further finds that the redistricting plan offered by Cowan-Watts is a constitutional alternative, but we do not adopt such measure because to do so would violate the Separation of Powers Doctrine. The final decision on redistricting is for the Cherokee Nation Tribal Council and they should act immediately to readdress the issue of redistricting by legislation.
Carattini v. Salazar — Leadership Dispute at Apache Tribe of Oklahoma
Here are the materials, in which the federal court affirmed a DOI decision related to a tribal election matter:
DCT Order Affirming DOI Decision
News Coverage of Seneca Election Battle (Featuring Rob Porter!)
From the Buffalo News, via Pechanga:
Robert Odawi Porter, 47, is proud of his Harvard Law School education and the fact that he left behind his career as a law professor to return to his roots in Western New York.
Maurice A. John Sr., 62, calls himself a warrior and says he has battled with the state and federal governments for decades.
The two men, both widely known in their tribe, are facing off in the Seneca Nation presidential election Nov. 2.
Porter has the backing of the powerful Seneca Party, which has dominated the Indian nation’s elections since the 1980s. John, who served a term as president from 2006 to 2008, is an independent.
Each insists he is the one to lead the Senecas through a stormy period marked by fights with the state over cigarette taxes and hundreds of millions of dollars in debts associated with the three Seneca casinos.
“I know I am the underdog. … I’m an old man taking on a big machine,” John told The Buffalo News. “But when I travel around our territories and talk to people face to face, I find that a lot of them agree with me that we have to get our financial house in order. We have to stop running up debts.”
Porter said addressing the debt problem is important to him, too. He wants the Seneca Nation to improve its economy by increasing educational opportunities for young people and by expanding the nation’s business interests beyond cigarettes, gasoline and casinos.
“My family never had a lot of money when I was growing up. We got some of our food from government programs,” Porter said. “What opened the door for me, and changed my life, was education.”
Porter grew up in Salamanca, where he was raised by his mother, Lana Redeye, a teacher who is now the Seneca Nation education director. He graduated from Salamanca High School and later earned degrees from Syracuse University and Harvard Law School.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.