Here is the unpublished opinion in United States v. Neff:
Briefs:
Friday Job Announcements
If you sent in a job announcement but do not see it here, then please read our recent post about the requirements for Turtle Talk Friday Job Announcements. Thank you for your understanding!
Any posts for an open Indian law or leadership job received prior to 12pm EST on Friday will appear in that week’s announcement, when the following information is sent to indigenous@law.msu.edu:
- In the email body, a typed brief description of the position which includes position title, location (city, state), main duties, and closing date;
- An attached PDF job announcement.
Please send all job announcements in this requested format.
Procopio
Native American Internship Program, San Diego, CA. Procopio’s Native American Law Practice Group offers 10-week paid internships for Native American law students or law students with an emphasis in Native American law. Interns join a nationwide network of the next generation of Native American Law attorneys in an active alumni program consisting of Tribal Judges, governmental attorneys, Tribal attorneys, university professors, entrepreneurs and associates at law firms. Applications can be emailed to ted.griswold@procopio.com. Applications are due Tuesday, October 15th, 2019.
Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians
Project Director, Bayfield, WI. Responsible for daily oversight of the Project LAUNCH grant as well as for overseeing the implementation of project activities internal and external coordination, staff oversight, developing materials, and conducting meetings. Also responsible for coordination with partners such as Early Childhood Center, Tribal Court, Indian Child Welfare Program, and the Bayfield School. Located at the Red Cliff Community Health Center. For more information please see the position description.
Kickapoo Traditional Tribe of Texas
Claims and Litigation Specialist, Eagle Pass, TX. Review settled insurance claims to determine that payments and settlements have been made in accordance with company practices and procedures. Report overpayments, underpayments, and other irregularities. Confer with legal counsel on claims requiring litigation. Find more information and fill out an application at: kickapootexas.org.
Pueblo of Laguna
Associate Prosecutor; Dept: Pueblo Court / Prosecutor’s Office; Open Until Filled.
Court Prosecutor; Dept: Pueblo Court / Prosecutor’s Office; Open Until Filled.
Public Defender; Dept: Pueblo Court; Open Until Filled.
Associate Judge; Dept: Pueblo Court; Open Until Filled.
Please visit the Pueblo of Laguna website for more information and application instructions at www.lagunapueblo-nsn.gov or you can contact the Human Resources office at (505) 552-6654.
Tohono O’odham Nation
Assistant Attorney General, Sells, AZ. The Office of Attorney General represents the Tohono O’odham Nation in litigation and other legal matters. Specific areas of need for the Office of Attorney General are healthcare law and contracts. Submit resume, legal writing sample and names, addresses and telephone numbers of three references to Joshua Rees, Acting Attorney General at joshua.rees@tonation-nsn.gov. Applications accepted until positions filled. Please see the position description for more information.
Kanji & Katzen PLLC
2020 Summer Associates (Seattle, WA; Ann Arbor, MI; Flagstaff, AZ). Kanji & Katzen PLLC is a nationally ranked firm of highly experienced attorneys who are committed to protecting and enhancing the sovereignty and vitality of Indian nations and their members. We are seeking 2020 summer associates in all three of our offices. To apply, please send a cover letter (indicating office preference), resume, legal writing sample, law school transcript, and references to twalrod@kanjikatzen.com. We will start reviewing applications on September 23, 2019. Please see announcement for more information.
See posts from August 30, 2019.
Want to post a job announcement to Turtle Talk? First, please read our recent post.
Split Eighth Circuit Panel Holds Tax on Casino Patrons is Preempted by IGRA
Split Eighth Circuit Panel Holds State Tax on Nonmember Contractor is not Preempted by IGRA
Idaho SCT Decides Coeur d’Alene Tribe Water Rights Matter Largely in Tribe’s Favor
Here is the opinion in In re:CSRBA Case No. 49576 (Idaho S. Ct.).
Briefs:
Coeur d’Alene Tribe Response Brief
Tenth Circuit Affirms Interior’s Decision to Acquire Trust Land for United Keetoowah Band
Here is the opinion in Cherokee Nation v. Bernhardt.
Briefs:
cherokee-nation-answer-brief.pdf
lower court materials here.
UPDATE:
ILPC/TICA Panel – Lessons from Standing Rock: Criminal Defense and Civil Litigation
Register today! Join us for the ILPC/TICA 16th Annual Indigenous Law Conference at the MSU College of Law
If you would like to sponsor this presentation or others, please contact Tribal In-House Counsel Association President Doreen McPaul at dmcpaul@nndoj.org.
For information about the agenda, sponsorships, and registration visit the event page.
Chicago Law Review Comment on Limiting State Eminent Domain Power under 25 USC § 357
Addison W. Bennett has published “Partially Tribal Land: The Case for Limiting State Eminent Domain Power under 25 USC § 357” in the University of Chicago Law Review (PDF).
The abstract:
When a state utility wishes to cross land located within a Native American reservation, but the landowners refuse to allow it, the utility in most circumstances may exercise eminent domain over the land. Under the authority of a federal statute, 25 USC § 357, states may generally condemn allotments, plots owned by individuals that lie within the sovereign boundaries of a tribal reservation. Courts have long recognized that the state authority to condemn these allotments under § 357 arises from the principle that individually owned allotments are no longer “tribal” land and, as a result, they are not protected by tribal sovereignty.
Congress’s failure to transition away from the allotment system has resulted in an ownership structure for certain plots of reservation land that it did not antic- ipate when it enacted § 357. Today, not all allotments are held entirely by individu- als, and many now contain fractional, undivided interests that belong to tribes themselves. This status of joint ownership between individuals and tribes, which this Comment refers to as “partially tribal,” leads to considerable complications with respect to the scope of § 357. Courts have routinely held that land owned by a sover- eign Native American tribe is not subject to state condemnation and that this prin- ciple protects tribal interests in allotments. Unresolved, however, is whether a tribal interest in an allotment—which can be as small as a fraction of 1 percent—should immunize even the nontribal interest in the plot from state condemnation proceed- ings. In other words, should a fractional tribal interest place an entire parcel out of the state’s reach?
This Comment argues that it should. The courts that have attempted to allow condemnations to proceed against partially tribal allotments run into the problem that all ownership interests in an allotment are undivided; each owner holds an undivided share of the whole parcel. This means there is no way to divide the tribal interests from the nontribal ones without effecting some kind of incursion on a tribal land interest without the tribe’s or Congress’s consent, a result that principles of tribal sovereignty squarely reject. This Comment recognizes that Congress’s intent when it passed § 357 was to eliminate tribal landholdings, but it argues that Congress has since changed course such that courts should disregard that original intent. This Comment also concedes that diminishing eminent domain power may lead to holdout problems, though it argues that protecting tribal sovereignty is the more important interest. Consistent with the principle that states may not diminish any tribal sovereignty without Congress’s consent, this Comment concludes that a state utility has multiple avenues for seeking access to a partially tribal allotment, including opportunities for negotiation with the tribe and the federal government. Courts should not permit states to use § 357 unilaterally to divest a nonconsenting tribe from its interest in land.
Hilary Tompkins on the Presidential Campaign and Indian Country
Here.
Spokane County Bar Association Indian Law Section Bar Prep Scholarship
More information here.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.