Louisiana Federal Court Dismisses Civil Rights Suit by Former Chair against Chitimacha Council

Here are the materials in Darden v. Vines (W.D. La.):

Adam Crepelle on an Intertribal Business Court

Interesting idea.

Adam Crepelle has published “An Intertribal Business Court” in the American Business Law Journal. Here is the abstract:

Few Indian reservations have any semblance of a private sector. Consequently, poverty and unemployment are major problems in much of Indian country. While there are many reasons why private enterprise is scarce in Indian country, one of the foremost reasons is businesses do not trust tribal courts. Businesses’ distrust of tribal courts is not unique as outsiders often fear bias in foreign tribunals. Similarly, businesses are often concerned about a court’s capacity to adjudicate complex disputes. Federal diversity jurisdiction was developed to allay fear of bias, and many states have developed business courts to address questions about court capacity. Tribes can overcome these issues by creating an intertribal business court (IBC). Tribes will be free to sculpt the IBC as they see fit. However, the IBC’s intertribal nature will help reduce fears of bias, and an IBC’s focus on business disputes will answer doubts about court capacity. An IBC will also make tribal law more accessible, further increasing confidence in this new tribunal. As businesses gain greater confidence in tribal legal institutions through the IBC, they will be more likely to operate in Indian country. Accordingly, the IBC could help to transform tribal economies.

MSU Indigenous Law & Policy Center Fall 2022 Recap Newsletter

As we continue through 2023, the Michigan State University College of Law Indigenous Law & Policy Center invites you to join us in reflecting upon and celebrating the accomplishments and achievements of our students, faculty, alumni, and community in the fall of 2022. Please view our newsletter, and stay up to date on current events in Indian law with Turtle Talk and follow us on social media for information on future events!

Follow & Contact Us:

Facebook: Click here.

Twitter: @ILPCTurtleTalk 

Instagram: @msu_ilpc

Email: indigenous@law.msu.edu

Call for Art for the 20th Annual Indigenous Law Conference

2023 Call for Art Now Open!

Submit materials to indigenous@law.msu.edu by April 23, 2023. See past conference art here.

Donia Center [UMich] Panel on Indigenous Language Rights on April 11 @ 4PM

Panel Discussion: International Indigenous Language Rights
April 11 @ 4 PM, 555 Weiser Hall

Panelists: Diego A. Tituaña, Ecuadorian diplomat, Facilitator of the UN resolution on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples from 2014-2019, and Kristen Carpenter, Council Tree Professor of Law; Director of the American Indian Law Program, University of Colorado Law School; Moderator: Matthew Fletcher, Harry Burns Hutchins Collegiate Professor of Law & Professor of American Culture, University of Michigan

Sho-Ban Tribes Prevail (in part) in Challenge to BLM Land Transfer to Polluter

Here are the materials in Shoshone-Bannock Tribes v. Daniel-Davis (D. Idaho):

Wyoming SCT Briefs in Northern Arapaho Tribe v. Baldwin Crocker & Rudd

Here:

Reply

Highlights of a related suit, Baldwin v. Harper (D. Wyo.):

DALL-E’s version of “lawyers yelling at lawyers in the style of Van Gogh” but looks like they’re all in a chorus line.

Ninth Circuit Briefs in Lexington Insurance v. Suquamish

Here:

Reply TK.

Lower court materials here.

Sauk-Suiattle v. Seattle Cert Petition

Here:

Questions presented:

  1. Is the court-created “futility” doctrine, which allows a United States court to decide a case removed from state court even though it lacks jurisdiction, repugnant to Article III of the Constitution?
  2. Does application of the so-called “futility” doctrine by a United States court to decide a case over which it lacks jurisdiction contravene 28 U.S.C. 1447(c), the plain language of which requires remand of the cause to the state court from which it was removed?
  3. Should the Supreme Court grant certiorari to reconcile a conflict among the circuit courts of appeal regarding the validity of the futility doctrine?

Lower court materials here.