Rina Swentzell Walks On

We’ve known for a few days that our great friend and inspirational leader Rina Swentzell had walked on, but we’ve taken a few extra days to collect our thoughts on how to best represent her.

We invited Rina to Michigan State’s annual Indian law conference in 2008 and she was very gracious in accepting our invitation. That year’s conference was dedicated to the 40th anniversary of the Indian Civil Rights Act legislation, and would eventually lead to a volume of edited essays on the Act published in 2012, the misleadingly titled book, The Indian Civil Rights Act at 40.

We knew about Rina from her prior appearances at law school conferences, but mostly from her compelling talk (published as a law review article), “Testimony of a Santa Clara Woman.” The talk remains for us one of the most compelling pieces of legal scholarship, cutting through the theoretical doctrines of law we hold so dear to the muscle and bone of what federal Indian law means to the Indian people it affects. In some ways she might not have understood at the time (although I suspect she might have), her testimony was a powerful and yet gentle rebuke to commentators critical and even supportive of the Supreme Court’s decision in Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, which had held that there was no federal forum to challenge a tribal law that discriminated against on its face against Indian women and their children.

At our 2008 conference, we invited several American Indian women from all over the country to talk about the Martinez decision, its legacy and its impact on their lives — Rina, Eva Petoskey, Rebecca Miles, Francine Jaramillo, and Gloria Valencia-Weber — as well as Catharine MacKinnon, one of the decision’s most critical detractors. To our surprise, all of the Indian women voiced strong support for the decision, despite the outcome. Rina was the center of that discussion. We published the commentaries of the Indian women next to Professor MacKinnon’s paper in the book in 2012.

Rina’s argument, over spirited objections, that the federal courts, even the Supreme Court, was no place to force change on tribal government and tribal law eventually prevailed. In 2014, the people of the Santa Clara Pueblo changed the tribal law in question in Martinez to be more reflective of tribal norms. Rina was a driving force in that tribal political movement.

We are terribly sad to hear of Rina’s passing, but we celebrate what she taught us.

Here is “Rina Swentzell, 1939-2015: Daughter says Santa Clara artist, activist fought for all but put family first.”

Disenrollment Resolution and Studies from the Association of American Indian Physicians

Here:

Dr. Walker Disenrollment Background Paper

Dr. Adachi Disenrollment Background Paper

Dr. Hill Background on Resolution

AAIP Resolution on Disenrollment

Tribal Disenrollee (San Pasqual Band of Diegueño Mission Indians) Suit in Federal Court against Interior Fails

Here are the materials in Alto v. Jewell (S.D. Cal.):

103-2 Alto Motion for Summary J

110-1 Interior Cross Motion

111 Alto Reply

113 Interior Reply

125 DCt Order

We posted on this case here, here, here, and here.

Federal Court Grants Voluntary Dismissal in Nooksack Case After BIA Waives FOIA Fees

Here are the materials in St. Germain v. Dept. of Interior (W.D. Wash.):

doc. 56 – Plaintiffs’ Motion for Voluntary Dismissal

doc. 59 – Order on Motion for Summary Judgment

Prior pleadings in this matter here, here, and here.

Sherman Alexie on Disenrollments

Sherman

7 Grand Ronde Ancestors Posthumously Disenrolled; Appeals Dismissed

Here are the newest materials in Alexander v. Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde:

At request of counsel for the plaintiffs (see statement below), we have removed these docs:

To Whom It May Concern:
At the behest of the Grand Ronde Tribal Government’s legal counsel, we have removed from our firm’s social media pages any links to certain legal briefs which were sealed under the Grand Ronde Tribal Court’s order issued in September of 2014.  We ask that you likewise remove any legal briefs from your pages.  We regret the inadvertent disclosure of these legal briefs.

66 Grand Ronde Treaty Descendants Judicially Disenrolled

Here are the materials in Alexander v. Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde:

At request of counsel for the plaintiffs (see statement below), we have removed these docs:

To Whom It May Concern:
At the behest of the Grand Ronde Tribal Government’s legal counsel, we have removed from our firm’s social media pages any links to certain legal briefs which were sealed under the Grand Ronde Tribal Court’s order issued in September of 2014.  We ask that you likewise remove any legal briefs from your pages.  We regret the inadvertent disclosure of these legal briefs.

IBIA Vacates and Remands Nooksack Enrollment Ordinance Decision by BIA Superintendent

Here is the order and opinion:

7-9-15 271 Order Vacating Decision and Remanding

News coverage here.

National Native American Bar Association Issues Formal Ethics Opinion on Duties of Advocates in Tribal Disenrollment Proceedings

Here is ethics opinion number 1: “Duties of Tribal Court Advocates to Ensure Due Process  Afforded to All Individuals Targeted for Disenrollment”:

National Native American Bar Association Formal Ethics Opinion No. 1

This follows up an earlier resolution from NNABA.