Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe v. Donald J. Trump

Here is the complaint in Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe v. Donald J. Trump, which relates to Cheyenne River’s Health Safety Checkpoints.

From the complaint:

The United States and the nation’s Native American tribes are in a state of emergency. COVID-19 is spreading rapidly throughout the country, infecting millions of people, including in South Dakota, which has had 6,353 confirmed cases and 83 deaths outside the boundaries of the Cheyenne River Sioux Reservation. Experts estimate that, for every confirmed COVID-19 case, there could be as many as eleven unconfirmed cases. “At this time, there is no known cure, no effective treatment, and no vaccine. Because people may be infected but asymptomatic, they may unwittingly infect others.” S. Bay United Pentecostal Church v. Newsom, 590 U.S. —-, 140 S. Ct. 1613, 2020 WL 2813056 at *1 (May 29, 2020) (Roberts, C.J., concurring).

On April 2, 2020, in direct response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe established a comprehensive COVID-19 response plan, including Health Safety checkpoints to monitor the entry of individuals onto the Tribe’s Reservation. These Health Safety Checkpoints have allowed the Tribe to effectively track individuals that have returned to the Reservation from hotspots throughout both the state of South Dakota and other off-Reservation locations and to keep the Tribe’s rate of infection significantly below the rate for South Dakota at large. To date, the Tribe has had no COVID-19 deaths.

News coverage here, and the press release can be seen here.

Tribes Sue EPA over Clean Water Act Rules

Here is the complaint in Pascua Yaqui Tribe v. EPA (D. Ariz.):

1 Complaint

Here is the complaint in Navajo Nation v. Wheeler (D. N.M.):

1 Complaint

Navajo Prevails on Damages Amount in 2014 Tribal Court Funding

Here are the materials in Navajo Nation v. Bernhardt (D.D.C.):

37 Federal Memorandum on Entry of Judgment

38 Navajo Response

39 Reply

44 Navajo Memorandum on Damages

45 Federal Response

46 Reply

48 DCT Order

Prior post here.

Briefs in Mandan Hidatsa and Arikara Nation v. Dept. of Interior [federal approval of drilling at Fort Berthold]

Here are the updated briefs in Mandan Hidatsa and Arikara Nation v. Dept. of Interior (D.N.D.):

75 MHA Nation MSJ

80 Slawson MSJ

81 Interior MSJ

87 MHA Nation Reply

Prior post here.

Federal Circuit Decides Inter-Tribal Council of Arizona Inc. v. United States [trust breach re: Phoenix Indian School]

Here is the opinion.

Briefs and lower court materials here.

MHA Nation Member Wins Challenge to Secretarial Election Disenfranchising Off-Reservation Voters

Here are the materials in Hudson v. Zinke (D.D.C.):

32 Amended Complaint

35-1 Hudson MSJ

38 US MSJ

40 Hudson Reply

42 US Reply

53 DCT Order

61ibia253

64ibia010

Federal Court Reverses IBIA Decisions on Leasing Consents

Here are the materials in Western Refining Southwest Inc. v. Dept. of the Interior (D.N.M.):

1 Complaint

1-1 2016 IBIA Decision

1-2 2013 IBIA Decision

16 Intervenors Rule 19 Motion to Dismiss

26 Western Refinery Response

27 Reply

28 DCT Order

29 Intervenors Rule 12 Motion to Dismiss

30 Interior Response

31 Western Refinery Response

32 DCT Order

44 Western Refinery Brief

45 Interior Response Brief

46 Reply

51 DCT Order

Federal Court Holds 1868 Treaty of Fort Laramie Imposes Duty on Federal Government to Provide Adequate Health Care at Rosebud

Here are the materials in Rosebud Sioux Tribe v. United States (D.S.D.):

An excerpt:

As to the tribes that entered into the 1868 Treaty of Fort Laramie for the reasons discussed above, the Government’s duty—expressed at the time as furnishing “to the Indians the physician… and that such appropriations shall be made from time to time, on the estimate of the Secretary of the Interior, as will be sufficient to employ such persons”—can be interpreted under the canons of construction applicable to Indian treaties as requiring the Government to provide competent physician-led health care to the Tribe.

Prior post here.

Ninth Circuit Rejects Upper Lake Pomo Citizens’ Play for Trust Land

Here is the unpublished opinion in Jackson v. United States.

Briefs:

opening-brief.pdf

us-brief.pdf

intervenors-brief.pdf

reply-brief.pdf

Lower court materials here.