The Atlantic: “Will Bears Ears Remain a National Monument?”

Here.

Federal Circuit Rejects Wyandot Nation of Kansas Trust Claims

Here is the opinion in Wyandot Nation of Kansas v. United States.

An excerpt:

The Wyandot Nation of Kansas (“Wyandot Nation”) is a Native American tribe allegedly tracing its ancestry to the Historic Wyandot Nation. It claims to be a federally recognized Indian tribe and a successor-in-interest to all of the treaties between the Historic Wyandot Nation and the United States. On June 1, 2015, Wyandot Nation filed a complaint in the United States Court of Federal Claims alleging that the United States had breached its trust and fiduciary obligations with respect to two trusts that resulted from prior treaties, including one related to amounts payable under a treaty signed in 1867 and one related to the Huron Cemetery. The Court of Federal Claims dismissed without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction and standing. Wyandot Nation appeals. We affirm.

Briefs here.

Federal Court Rules Against Burley Faction in California Miwok Dispute

Here are the materials in California Valley Miwok Tribe v. Zinke (E.D. Cal.):

44-1 Burley Motion for Summary J

46 US Cross-Motion

47 Dixie Cross-Motion

48 Burley Response

50 US Response

51 Dixie Response

53 Burley Reply

56 US Reply

57 Dixie Reply

60 DCT Order

DOI Consultation Notice on DOI Reorganization

Download(PDF): Tribal Listening Sessions on E.O. 13871: Reorganization of the Executive Branch

Acting Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs, Michael S. Black, invites Tribal leaders to attend one of the listed listening sessions to provide input on improving “efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability” at the Department of the Interior.

DATES

Nooksack Kelly Faction Files Notice of Appeal in Rabang v. Kelly; IHS Reassumes Services “Effective Immediately”

Here is the notice of appeal:

Notice of Appeal

And the IHS letter:

May 16 Letter from IHS to Robert Kelly Jr

The Guardian: “New Mexico’s tribal groups gear up to fight for their home”

Here.

Updated Standing Rock/NoDAPL Pleadings (March 21-May 11) [Update: thru May 17]

Here are updated pleadings in Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. United States Army Corps of Engineers (D.D.C.):

194 DAPL Reply re Vance Resp to Ct Order

195 SRST Opp to ACOE & DAPL Mtns for Partial Sum Judg

198 Consol Reply to Motion to Amend Complaint

198 CRST Motion to Extend Time

200 SRST Reply to Motion to Amend Complaint

201 ACOE Reply in Support of Mtn Partial Summ Judg re SRST

203 DAPL Reply in Support of ACOE Cross-Mtn for Partial Summ Judgment

205 Opinion re DAPL Mtn for Protective Order

205 Order re DAPL Mtn for Protective Order

207 CRST Reply in Support of MPSJ & Opp Cross-Mtns

208 CRST Reply in Supp of MPSJ & Opp Cross-Mtns209 Joint Appendix

212 Errata-Joint Appendix

213 DAPL Reply in Support of Mtn for Partial Summary Judgment

214 ACOE Repl Supp Mtn PSJ

216 DAPL Motion to Compel

216-1 DAPL Memorandum in Support of Motion to Compel

217 ACOE Answer

218 Joint Appendix

219 SRST Response to Motion to Compel

220 Intervenor Motion to Supplement the Record

221 Notice of Addition of Documents to the Record

222 Oglala Opp to Mtn to Compel

223 ACOE Resp to Mtn to Compel

224 ACOE Motion to Extend Time

225 DAPL Reply in Support of Motion to Compel

225-1 Debold Dec

226 DAPL Unopp Mtn to Intervene

226-1 Proposed Responsive Pleading

226-2 Answer

Navajo Sues Interior over FY2017 Judicial Contract

Here is the complaint in Navajo Nation v. Dept. of Interior (D.D.C.):

Complaint

An excerpt:

Plaintiff Navajo Nation (“Nation”) seeks relief for Defendants’ violations of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act, as amended, 25 U.S.C. § 5301 et seq. (“ISDEAA”), and regulations promulgated thereunder, and for Defendants’ breach of a self-determination contract made under the ISDEAA. Under the ISDEAA and governing regulations, Defendants may not decline an Indian tribe’s renewal proposal for a self-determination contract, or contract funding, if it is substantially the same as the prior contract. The Nation submitted a renewal proposal to the Department of the Interior (“Department”) for their contract covering operations of the Navajo Nation Judicial Branch that proposed funding in the amount of $17,055,477 for calendar year (“CY”) 2017. This was the same amount that the Nation sought for CY 2016 and was essentially the same amount that the Nation had previously sought for CY 2014 and CY 2015 ($17,055,517) and which had been approved by operation of law because of Defendants’ failure to decline the Nation’sCY 2014 funding proposal within the 90-day review period established by law. Nonetheless, Defendants partially declined the Nation’s renewal proposal for all funding in excess of $1,429,177.00 for CY 2017. Because Defendants’ action violates the ISDEAA and applicable regulations, the Nation is entitled to declaratory and injunctive relief and damages.

Federal Court Dismisses Nooksack v. Zinke; Plaintiff Lacks Standing as “Nooksack Tribe”

Here are the materials in Nooksack Indian Tribe v. Zinke (W.D. Wash.):

19 – Nooksack Tribe’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction

26 – Federal Defendants’ Opposition to Preliminary Injunction Motion and Cross-Motion to Dismiss

29 – Nooksack Tribe’s Reply in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction

36 – Nooksack Tribe’s Response in Opposition to Federal Defendants’ Cross-Motion to Dismiss or for Summary Judgment

39 – Secretary’s Reply re Motion to Dismiss

43 – Order Granting Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss

44 – Judgment

Federal Court Dismisses FTCA Claim Arising from Hot Oil Burn at Indian School

Here are the materials in Lightning Fire v. United States (D.S.D.):

20 Motion to Dismiss

28 Response

32 Reply

34 DCT Order