WaPo: “Canada’s Supreme Court to consider whether Native Americans in U.S. have rights north of the border”

Here.

The Supreme Court of Canada materials on Her Majesty the Queen v. Richard Lee Desautel are here.

Governor Newsom’s Order Regarding Tribal Lands

Here is the order:

9.25.20-Native-Ancestral-Lands-Policy

David Sandino commentary on this order here:

The first people of California occupied the state tens of thousands of years before European contact. The entire state of California was Tribal lands. Slowly but surely, the lands were taken away from the Tribes, first by the Spanish government, next by the Mexican government, next by the U.S. after the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, and finally by California after it became a state in 1850. In the 1850’s, the U.S. negotiated 18 treaties with some of the Tribes, reserving about 9 percent of the state for these Tribal nations. However, the treaties were opposed by California senators, never ratified by the Senate, and hidden from public view by the Senate for 50 years. In recognition of these past injustices, on September 25, Governor Newsom issued a Statement of Administration Policy giving Native Americans the opportunity to access, co-manage, and acquire lands now owned by the state. The state has substantial land holdings under the jurisdiction of the State Lands Commission and other state agencies. California’s largest landowner by far is the federal government, owning 46% of the state.

CalTribe-precontact

Federal Court Dismisses Most Claims by Water Protectors against State and County over NoDAPL Protests

Here are the materials in Thunderhawk v. County of Morton (D.N.D.):

38 TigerSwan Answer + Counterclaim

44 Amended Complaint

45-1 Motion to Dismiss TigerSwan Counterclaim

49 County Motion to Dismiss

52 State Motion to Dismiss

56 TigerSwam Answer + 2d Counterclaim

57 TigerSwan Opposition to 45

58 Reply in Support of 45

61 Response to County MTD

62 Response to State MTD

67-1 Motion to Dismiss TigerSwan 2d Counterclaim

71 County Reply in Support of 49

73 TigerSwan Opposition to 67

76 State Reply in Support of 52

82 TigerSwan MSJ

84 Response to TigerSwan MSJ

85 TigerSwan Reply in Support of 82

87 DCT Order Dismissing TigerSwan Counterclaim

88 DCT Order

Ninth Circuit Briefs in Doucette v. Dept. of the Interior [Nooksack]

Here:

Opening Brief

Answer Brief

Plaintiffs-Appellants’ Motion to Take Judicial Notice

Reply Brief of Plaintiffs-Appellants

Lower court materials here.

ASU Indian Child Welfare Act Webinar (10/21/2020)

ICWA in Action flyer

Indian Child Welfare Act Webinar – in 2 weeks 

October 21 

2:00-3:30 pm Pacific time 

ASU Law’s Indian Legal Program is proud to host a webinar on the latest developments in the implementation of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA). Please join us for an engaging session with panelists:  

  • Kimberly A. Cluff, former General Counsel, Morongo Band of Mission Indians
  • Kathryn E. Fort, Director and Adjunct Professor, Michigan State University College of Law Indian Law Clinic
  • Chrissi Ross Nimmo, Attorney General, Cherokee Nation Deputy
  • April Olson (’06), Partner, Rothstein Donatelli LLP
  • Lawrence Roberts (Moderator), Professor of Practice and Executive Director, ASU Law’s Indian Gaming and Tribal Self-Governance Programs

Register for free webinar at: law.asu.edu/icwa

Larissa FastHorse is a 2020 MacArthur Foundation Award Winner

Here.

Ninth Circuit Briefing — Tribal Sovereign Immunity Under the Clean Water Act

Here are the briefs relevant to the sovereign immunity issue in Deschutes River Alliance v. Portland General Electric Company:

Final Tribal Amici Brief in Support of Warm Springs – File-Stamped

Appellant’s First Brief

Second Brief on Cross-Appeal – CTWS (filed 9 28 20)

Appellant’s Third Brief

Idaho Power Amicus Brief

PGE Brief

PGE Reply

Tribal Amicus Brief

Warm Springs Reply

And here are the lower court materials in Deschutes River Alliance v. Portland General Electric Company (D. Or.):

72 Warm Springs Motion to Dismiss

74 Pacific Gas Motion to Dismiss

76 Deschutes River Response

78 Pacific Gas Reply

82 Warm Springs Reply

84 Warm Springs Brief in Support of Defendants

103 DCT Order

Materials in Upper Skagit & Sauk-Suiattle U&A Dispute

Here are the materials so far in United States v. Washington (W.D. Wash.), subproceeding 20-01, aka Upper Skagit Indian Tribe v. Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe:

1-1 Upper Skagit Request

2 Motion for TRO

6 Sauk-Suiattle Response to 1

7 Sauk-Suiattle Response to 2

8 DCT Order Granting 1

15 Tulalip Response to 2

20 DCT Order Denying 2

Update (11-12-2020):

22 Motion for Reconsideration

23 Saul-Suiattle Response

24 Upper Skagit MSJ

27 Sauk-Suiattle MTD

28 Sauk-Suiattle Response to 24

29 Swinomish Response to 24

31 Upper Skagit Reply in Support of 24

33 Swinomish Response to 27

34 Upper Skagit Response to 27

35 Sauk-Suiattle Reply in Support of 27

36 DCT Order Denying Motion for Reconsideration

News Profile on Indian Country Broadband Issues

Here is “Rez Connectivity, Human Rights ‘Necessity’” from the Esperanza Project.

Wash. Appeals Court Orders New Trial in Snohomish County Deputy’s Killing of Tulalip Man

Here are the materials in Lacy v. Snohomish County (Wash. Ct. App.):

4-15-19 Appellant’s Opening Brief

5-17-19 Respondent Cross Appellant’s Brief

6-14-19 Appellant’s Reply Brief

10-5-20 Opinion

Prior post here.