TICA Panel #1 — ICWA Q&A
TICA Keynote Speaker Chrissi Ross Nimmo
TICA Conference Day 1 — Introduction of the TICA Board
Federal Circuit Revives Portions of Lummi/Hopi/Fort Berthold Housing Authorities NAHASDA Claims
Here is the opinion in Lummi Tribe v. United States (Fed. Cir.). An excerpt:
[W]e conclude that because neither the Claims Court nor this court previously adjudicated Lummi’s breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and breach of trust claims, the Claims Court erred by dismissing Lummi’s entire case.
Briefs:
Prior posts here.
Inforum: “Swedish activist Greta Thunberg brings climate message to Standing Rock Sioux Nation”
Here.
New Republic: “The Next Standing Rock Is Everywhere”
Interior Prevails in Wilton Rancheria Trust Land Acquisition Matter
Here is the opinion in Stand Up for California! v. Dept. of Interior (D.D.C.):
Materials here.
D.C. Council to Consider Indigenous Peoples’ Day
From David Grosso, D.C. Council Member:
For Immediate Release
October 7, 2019
Contact
Matthew Nocella, 202.724.8105
mnocella@dccouncil.us
It’s time to honor Indigenous Peoples’ Day in D.C.
Washington, D.C. – The following is a statement from Councilmember David Grosso ahead of tomorrow’s legislative meeting of the Council of the District of Columbia, where he will propose legislation to rename the holiday celebrated on the second Monday in October to “Indigenous Peoples’ Day”:
“For at least five years now legislation supported by a majority of the Council that would honor our native populations and rename Columbus Day to Indigenous Peoples’ Day has been stalled by Chairman Mendelson without any public input or hearing.
“Tomorrow, along with Councilmembers Cheh, Bonds, Nadeau, Trayon White, and Robert White, I will put forth legislation that will force a vote of the full Council to finally do the right thing by ending the celebration of the misleading narrative of Christopher Columbus on the second Monday in October.
“This move is not controversial. Maine, New Mexico, Vermont, North Carolina, Alaska, South Dakota, Oregon, and at least 130 cities and towns have now renamed the holiday, according to the New York Times.
“This is not just a movement in other areas of the country—I feel it right here in the District of Columbia every single day. I get letters from students requesting the name change; I know many schools use the holiday to honor Indigenous People instead of Christopher Columbus; and frankly, it’s an accident of history that Columbus is honored in this way.
“Columbus Day was officially designated as a federal holiday in 1937 despite the fact that Columbus did not discover North America, despite the fact that millions of people were already living in North America upon his arrival in the Americas, and despite the fact that Columbus never set foot on the shores of the current United States.
“Columbus enslaved, colonized, mutilated, and massacred thousands of Indigenous People in the Americas.
“We cannot continue to allow this history to be celebrated as a holiday in the District of Columbia. The government of the District of Columbia is clear that we are a government that values equality, diversity, and inclusion. Continuing to observe a holiday built on the celebration of oppression runs counter to those values.
“Already a majority of the Council has indicated their support to re-designate the second Monday in October through previous bills. It is my hope that we can come together tomorrow and honor Indigenous People and their rich history and cultural contributions with a ‘yes’ vote ahead of October 14.”
Office of Councilmember David Grosso
1350 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Suite 402
Washington, Dc 20004 Continue reading
SCOTUS Denies Cert in Oglala Sioux Tribe v. Fleming
Washington SCT Amends Tribal Court Jurisdiction Court Order 82.5
Here is the order. The amendment:
(d) Communication Between Superior Court of Any County of this State and Indian Tribal Court.
(1) A superior court of any county of this state may communicate with any Indian tribal court concerning co-occurring proceedings, whether they are active or have been concluded. The parties shall provide to the respective courts the identity, contact information, and a case or docket number of the other court’s proceedings to facilitate this communication.
(2) The superior court may allow the parties to participate in the communication. If the parties are not able or allowed to participate in the communication, they shall be given an opportunity to present facts and legal arguments in writing before a decision is made regarding the communication, or the subject of communication, by the superior court. The Indian tribal court‘s procedures and customs shall determine the parties’ participation in the Indian tribal court proceedings.
(3) The superior court shall make a record of a communication made pursuant to this section. The parties shall be informed promptly of the communication by the superior court and granted access to the record. The Indian tribal court‘s procedures shall determine whether and how a record is made in Indian tribal court proceedings, and whether and how parties may be informed of the communication or granted access to a record of the communication.
(4) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (3) of this section, communication between the superior court and the Indian tribal court regarding scheduling, administrative or emergency purposes, and similar matters may occur without informing the parties. The superior court need not make a record of the communication under this section. The Indian tribal court‘s procedures shall determine whether and how a record is made in Indian tribal court proceedings of such communication.
(5) For the purposes of this section, “record” means information that is inscribed on a tangible medium or that is stored in an electronic or other medium and is retrievable in perceivable form.
(6) The superior court shall follow the procedures set forth in subsection (3) of this section when communicating regarding adult criminal matters, except as otherwise authorized by law. The Indian tribal court‘s procedures shall determine the requirements for communication regarding adult criminal matters in Indian tribal court proceedings. Superior courts and Indian tribal courts may communicate about the orders prohibiting contact as set forth in subsections (1) – (5) above.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.