Blast from the Past: 1967 Advert for PLSI in the Indian Historian Magazine

The rest of the issue is here.

Michigan Tribes Exit U.S. Army Corps Sham “Consultation” re: Line 5

Here:

D.C. Circuit Briefs in Narragansett Challenge to Providence Bridge

Here are the briefs in Narragansett Indian Tribe v. White:

Narrangansett Opening Brief

USET Amicus Brief

Lower court materials here.

UCLA  Law Native Nations Law & Policy Center Event: “The Native Bench: Justice, Democracy, and the Federal Judiciary”

Minnesota Federal Court Dismisses State Suit against White Earth re: Tribal Water Use Permitting Law

Here are the materials in R.D. Offutt Farms Co. v. White Earth Division of Natural Resources (D. Minn.):

1 Complaint

18 Motion to Dismiss

26 Opposition

39 Reply

46 DCT Order

Alexandra Fay on the History of the Courts of Indian Offenses

Alexandra Fay has posted “Courts of Indian Offenses, Courts of Indian Resistance,” forthcoming in the Michigan Law Review (Go Blue), on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

In the late nineteenth century, the Department of the Interior created the Courts of Indian Offenses with the express goal of eliminating elements of Native culture through the coercive power of criminal law. The courts stood on dubious constitutional grounds, they were almost universally replaced by tribal courts in the twentieth century, and they have been widely derided as crude assimilationist tools.

This Article examines the Courts of Indian Offenses to study how law and legal institutions operate as sites of colonial struggle in the American context. The Courts of Indian Offenses were formally created to criminalize Native culture. In practice, they were more complicated. Native judges entrusted with Washington’s assimilationist designs frequently declined to enforce the “Indian offenses,” instead using the courts to resolve crimes and disputes recognized by their tribal communities.

The Article uses three decades of annual reports from the Commissioner of Indian Affairs and archival records from three Courts of Indian Offenses to illustrate the structure and function of the courts at the turn of the twentieth century. It engages with concepts from subaltern studies, tribal legal studies, and law and colonialism literatures to explore how tribal law adapted and survived despite the formal imposition of Anglo-American legal forms. The Article ultimately suggests that the Courts of Indian Offenses may be understood as contested institutions through which tribal leaders preserved tribal self-government against the imperatives of empire.

An exact representation of the original Court of Indian Offenses. . . .

Minnesota SCT Justice Anne McKeig to Visit MSU ILPC This Thursday

New Student Scholarship on Tribal Disenrollments

John K. Crawford (Forest County Potawatomi) has published “Disenrollment as Citizenship Revocation: Promoting Tribal Sovereignty by Embracing International Norms” in the Yale Law Journal.

Here is the abstract:

This Note argues that Indian tribes can best address disenrollment by viewing the problem through the lens of international norms regarding citizenship revocation. Tribal officials and members, advocates and journalists, and scholars and practitioners of federal Indian law typically understand disenrollment, which is when a tribe severs its governmental relationship with certain members, as a practice unique to Indian Country. However, while tribes’ unique legal status facilitates disenrollment, this practice can nevertheless be understood as a form of citizenship revocation, which is when a state deprives certain persons of their previously held citizenship. By understanding disenrollment as citizenship revocation, tribes can draw from a wide body of existing literature about states’ citizenship-revocation regimes when considering limitations on their power to disenroll. If tribes choose to address disenrollment by embracing international norms regarding citizenship revocation, they will not simply invoke tribal sovereignty, as sometimes occurs under the current status quo, but instead promote it by advancing good governance and aligning their sovereignty with state sovereignty.

This is no reflection on the quality of this paper, which seems excellent, but I have a limited number of Yale pics. And this one is straight fire.

Complaint in Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium v. Kennedy

Here: