tribal membership – Page 18

Nooksack Disenrollments Enjoined

February 24, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is a news article noting that Judge Doucet ruled from the bench.

An excerpt:

In a hearing Monday afternoon, Feb. 23, Nooksack Tribal Court Judge pro tem Randy Doucet held with the court’s previous rulings: Until tribal council has final word from the Secretary of the Department of the Interior, they may not disenroll anyone, said lawyers for the affected members. A reporter was not allowed in the courtroom as only five people for each side were admitted.

Briefs:

2-10-15 Plaintiffs’ Emergency Motion To Enforce Injuction Orders

2-10-15 Plaintiffs’ Response in Opposition To Defendants Notice of Compliance

2-19-15 Defendants’ Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Emergency Motion to Enforce Injunction Orders

2-20-15 Reply Re Plaintiffs’ Emergency Motion to Enforce Injunction Orders

Nooksack Tribe Gears Up for Reinstituting Disenrollment Proceedings

February 5, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials:

2013 – CI-CL-003 (ROBERTS) Notice of Compliance

2014-CI-CL-007 (BELMONT) Notice of Compliance

“The Unintended Consequences of Disenrollment”

February 3, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here.

Federal Court Challenge to Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians Membership Decisions Dismissed

January 19, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Miranda v. Jewell (C.D. Cal.):

20 Miranda Motion for Summary J

25 Interior Cross-Motion

32 Miranda Reply

33 Interior Reply

37 DCT Order

An excerpt:

In the absence of a clear directive in the SYB Articles that blood degree of prospective members should be determined based only on the blood degree of an ancestor as listed on the 1940 Census, the Court declines to second guess the Bureau’s reasonable decision to apply SYB law in the same manner in which the Tribe applied it.

Federal Court Rejects Challenge to Federal Decision in Pala Disenrollment Dispute

November 21, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

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

54-1 Aguayo Motion for Summary J

57-1 Federal Cross Motion for Summary J

59 Aguayo Reply

60 Federal Reply

Aguayo v. Jewell Judgement in Civil Case.11.18.14 (1)

Aguayo v. Jewell.Order Dismissing.11.18.14

Prior post in this proceeding here. Related posts here and here.

New Scholarship from Circe Strum on the Cherokee Freedmen

September 2, 2014Kate Fort

Here.

Abstract:

Despite a treaty in 1866 between the Cherokee Nation and the federal government granting them full tribal citizenship, Cherokee Freedmen—the descendants of African American slaves to the Cherokee, as well as of children born from unions between African Americans and Cherokee tribal members—continue to be one of the most marginalized communities within Indian Country. Any time Freedmen have sought the full rights and benefits given other Cherokee citizens, they have encountered intense opposition, including a 2007 vote that effectively ousted them from the tribe. The debates surrounding this recent decision provide an excellent case study for exploring the intersections of race and sovereignty. In this article, I use the most recent Cherokee Freedmen controversy to examine how racial discourse both empowers and diminishes tribal sovereignty, and what happens in settler-colonial contexts when the exercise of tribal rights comes into conflict with civil rights. I also explore how settler colonialism as an analytic can obscure the racialized power dynamics that undermine Freedmen claims to an indigenous identity and tribal citizenship.