Here is the letter:
Pala Disenrollments Response-Chappabitty Letter.2.28.12pdf
UPDATE: Appeal Document — Pala Disenrollment 2.25.12
Prior materials are here.
tribal membership
News Article about Rising Tribal Enrollment Numbers (Excluding the Disenrollment Tribes, of course)
Good news:
The swelling membership of the Tulalip Tribes, based near Everett, Washington, for example, is a point of pride for tribal member and state representative John McCoy, who believes improved health care and an above-average birth rate are at play.
“We’re living longer. Our babies are surviving birth,” says McCoy, adding that more jobs on reservations, led by tribal gaming, is another reason for the growth. “So we have our peoples coming back from other states. They’re coming home because there is an economy.”
At Tulalip, that adds up to a 22 percent growth rate over the past decade. Other tribes around the country have grown even faster.
And not so good:
At the other end of the spectrum are tribes whose enrollments are stagnating, including for example the Colville Confederated Tribes in northeast Washington.
Tribal councilmember Ricky Gabriel has proposed a referendum to relax the blood requirement in the tribal constitution so more children of mixed marriages can enroll.
“I’ve had a lot of very positive [reactions],” he says. “The elders are extremely happy about this. They’re pushing hard. They’re seeing their grandchildren not be able to be enrolled.”
Enrollment in the tribe currently requires a minimum of one-quarter Colville blood. But when you have intermarriage, that bloodline is diluted. It takes just a couple of generations of intermarriage to put the children at risk of being disqualified from membership.
Then the tribal population withers. The proposed referendum would change the rules to count any Indian blood toward the minimum.
Pala Band Disenrolls 15 Percent of Its Membership
Here.
South Dakota SCT Remands American Indian Probate Case to Allow Newly-Enrolled Heir to Reopen BIA Probate Decision
Here is the opinion in In re Estate of Flaws.
An excerpt:
Based upon the plain language of SDCL 29A-2-114 and the foregoing authorities, we hold that the trial court did not err in determining that the methods and time limits in the statute for establishing paternity are exclusive. A question remains, however, as to whether Yvette failed to comply with any of them. The trial court found that Yvette had petitioned the Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Office of Hearings and Appeals to reopen Donald’s probate to include her as an heir. For that reason, the court initially took this matter under advisement to see if Yvette’s petition would be granted. The court subsequently determined it could take more than a year to have Yvette’s petition heard. For that reason, the court issued its decision and this appeal followed. The day after the filing of Yvette’s appellant’s brief, however, the Bureau of Indian Affairs tribunal issued an order directing any parties opposed to naming Yvette as an heir to Donald’s estate to show cause for their objections within thirty days. Thus, Yvette’s efforts to reopen Donald’s probate may still prove successful, permitting her to comply with SDCL 29A-2-114(c) to establish Donald’s paternity. In the interests of justice, therefore, we remand this matter to the trial court to wait for a reasonable time for the Bureau of Indian Affairs’ decision and to proceed accordingly.
Turtle Talk 