Here are the materials in California Valley Miwok Tribe v. Haaland (D.D.C.):
D.C. Federal Court Declines to Overturn Newland Opinion in California Miwok Tribe Membership Dispute
tribal membership
Sault Tribe Appellate Court Rejects Challenges to Election that Opened Membership Rolls
Here is the opinion in McRorie v. Election Committee (Sault Tribe of Chippewa App. Ct.):
Tribal SCT Briefs in Citizenship Board of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation v. Grayson
D.C. Federal Court Declines to Enjoin Interior Work to Organize California Valley Miwok Tribe
Here are the materials in the case captioned California Valley Miwok Tribe v. Haaland (D.D.C.):
37 Motion for Preliminary Injunction
Tenth Circuit Briefs in Challenge to “Indian Status” of Cherokee Nation Citizen
Here are the briefs in United States v. Laskey:
MCN District Court Orders Enrollment Office to Reconsider Denials of Freedmen Descendants’ Citizenship Applications
Here is the order in Grayson v. Citizenship Board (MCN Dist. Ct.):
mcn dist. ct., order and opinion on appeal from citizenship board of the muscogee (creek) nation denial of creek freedmen citizenship application, 09272023.pdfDownload
SCOTUSBlog Recap of Arizona v. Navajo Opinion
New Student Scholarship on Tribal Citizenship and Blood Quantum
Ashleigh Lussenden has published a Note, “Blood Quantum and the Ever-Tightening Chokehold on Tribal Citizenship: The Reproductive Justice Implications of Blood Quantum Requirements,” in the California Law Review. PDF
The abstract:
Blood often serves as the basis for identity for many groups in the United States. Native Americans, however, are the only population in which blood is a requirement for collective belonging and can be the determining factor for whether one receives tribal benefits and services. Many Tribal Nations use blood quantum, the percentage of Indian blood one has, as a bright-line rule to determine qualification for tribal membership. Initially established as a colonial tool of dispossession and assimilation, tribes adopted blood quantum to ensure the preservation of culture and community.
This Article contends that tribal adoption of blood quantum limits tribal members’ reproductive autonomy and violates the tenets of reproductive justice. Forcing tribal members to consider the blood quantum of their future children limits individual choice of partner and the manner in which tribal members choose to build their families. This limitation of autonomy and violation of reproductive justice principles is especially stark when analyzed in combination with contemporary pressures on Native conception and parenting, including urban migration, dysgenic environmental impacts on fertility, sexual violence, and inadequate, underfunded, and abusive reproductive healthcare. Collectively, these pressures decrease fertility, the number of available partners, and the ability for Native people to conceive and parent within their own communities.
By applying the principles of reproductive justice, Tribal Nations may begin to reassess what belonging means in Native communities and how tribal membership policies can support reproductive autonomy. The current rise of nation-building and concentrated push for self-determination in Native communities provides a unique opportunity to interrogate the priorities of tribal membership requirements and reimagine inclusion and collective belonging in Native Nations.
Fletcher on Tribal Customary Law and an Indigenous Canon of Construction
Check out “The Three Lives of Mamengwaa: Toward an Indigenous Canon of Construction” on SSRN.
Abstract:
This paper will survey the history of tribal courts, which allows for an explanation for the reasons behind the relatively minimal impact tribal courts have had on Indian country governance, drawing on the work of Rob Porter. The paper will then turn to the monumental changes in tribal judiciaries and in tribal legal practice of the last few decades, which in turn allows for a discussion about several recent tribal court decisions that could signal a future where tribal courts play a far greater role in regulating Indian country governance through the application of customary law, drawing on the work of Wenona Singel. Finally, the paper offers preliminary thoughts on whether adding robust tribal judicial regulation to an already crowded field of Indian country governance is normatively beneficial. Short answer? Yes. Many of the intractable political disputes that plague tribal governance can be traced to the reliance by tribal governments on state and federal legal principles that are deeply flawed and have limited value in Indigenous contexts. I suggest the acknowledgment of an Indigenous Canon of Construction of tribal laws by tribal judiciaries that limit the impact of colonization on tribal nations.
Gabe Galanda on Indigenous Kinship Renewal and Relational Sovereignty
Gabriel Galanda has posted “In the Spirit of Vine Deloria, Jr.: Indigenous Kinship Renewal and Relational Sovereignty” on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
This essay heeds Vine Deloria, Jr.’s inspiring call for the renewal of Indigenous kinship tradition and counsels for the development of relational sovereignty. The first part deconstructs the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1978 landmark decision in Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez to expose its distinctly economic underpinnings. That case exemplifies a steady erosion of Indigenous reciprocity, and concurrent rise of tribal per-capitalism and neocolonialism. The second part suggests five actions that Native nations could take to restore inclusionary, duty-based kinship systems and rules. First, Native nations should replace blood quantum with alternative citizenship criteria rooted in traditional kinship principles. Second, Native nations should renew kinship terminology to eliminate neocolonial identifiers. Third, Native nations should outlaw disenrollment and bring their relatives home. Fourth, Native nations should lift enrollment moratoria and welcome their lost generations. Lastly, Native nations should—after pausing to understand the colonial legacy of federally sanctioned monetary distributions to tribal individuals—cease per capita payments and reinvest in community revitalization. By drawing on Indigenous traditions of reciprocity and shared destiny, Native nations should reconcile their peoples’ modern individual rights with their customary obligations and duties to one another. Through these strategies, Native nations can engage in a new paradigm of relational sovereignty, whereby Indigenous human existence is exalted and protected over individual power and profit.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.