New Article on the Fight to Defend ICWA in The Washington Post Magazine

Neoshia Roemer

Although ICWA’s opponents argue that the law is harmful to Native children, not following ICWA harms both Native children and tribal communities. When state courts follow ICWA from the outset of a child welfare case, the outcomes of the case are vastly improved. Most of the ICWA cases that reach appellate courts involve cases where state agencies and courts failed to apply ICWA at the outset of the case. Simply stated, ICWA works when state agencies and courts properly apply the law.

For more, please read the article here.

Native American Pipeline to Law Workshop at UC Berkeley: Still Accepting Applications

Monica Williamson

Pipeline

This is a great opportunity for students to learn about law school, admissions criteria, LSAT prep, and more. Registration is free, food and lodging is provided, and a limited number of LSAT Prep courses will be available for participating students. It does not matter which school the student wishes to attend: these sessions are geared to help all students.

Date: June 26-30, 2019
Location: UC Berkeley School of Law
Boalt Hall, 225 Bancroft Way, Berkeley, CA 94720 (map)
For more information, visit: law.asu.edu/pipelinetolaw
Deadline: May 1, 2019
Questions? Contact Kate Rosier at 480-965-6204

Current law students who completed one of the Pipeline to Law Workshops highly encourage others to register and participate. Read their stories.

Oglala Sioux Tribe v. Fleming Cert Petition

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

cert petition

Questions presented:

1. Whether the Eighth Circuit erred in holding, in conflict with decisions of this Court and three other courts of appeals, that the possibility of filing a separate mandamus action was in and of itself “sufficient” to provide an “adequate opportunity” requiring Younger abstention, where plaintiffs had no opportunity to challenge the constitutionality of the preliminary hearing procedure in the course of the state’s abuse and neglect proceedings?
2. Whether the court of appeals erred in holding, in conflict with three courts of appeals, that the “extraordinary circumstances” exception to Younger abstention applies only to flagrantly and patently unconstitutional statutes, but not to flagrantly and patently unconstitutional policies, and in concluding that separating children from their parents for sixty days with no notice or opportunity to be heard inflicted no irreparable harm?

Lower court materials here.

New Mexico Pueblos Prevail in Revenue Sharing Dispute with State [Free Play]

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Pueblo of Isleta v. Lujan Grisham (D.N.M.):

55 State MSJ

58 Pueblo Response

62 State Reply

67-1 Santa Ana Pueblo et al MSJ

68 Isleta Pueblo et al MSJ

71 State Response to 68

72 State Response to 67

74 Isleta Reply

81 State Motion for Discovery

84 Pueblos Motion for Protective Order

88 State Response to 84

91 Pueblos Reply in Support of 84

125 DCT Order

Complaint here.

Narragansett NHPA Consultation Suit

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the complaint Narragansett Indian Tribe v. Federal Highway Administration (D.R.I.):

1-complaint-2.pdf

An excerpt:

The Tribe brings this action to challenge the termination of a programmatic agreement(“PA”) entered into pursuant to the regulations of the National Historic Preservation Act (“NHPA”). The termination of the PA occurred after substantial construction had taken place on the project for which the PA was meant to address and resolve the adverse effects of the project on historic properties to the signatories’ satisfaction. The termination of the PA after substantial work had been performed on the project, and the subsequent final decision of the Federal Highway Association (“FHWA”) was arbitrary and capricious.

Tribal Amicus Brief in Texas v. United States [ACA Appeal in Fifth Circuit]

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

texas-tribal-amicus-final-4-1-19-as-filed-1.pdf

4-1-2019-letter-to-doj-re-texas-v-us-and-ihcia-impacts-final.pdf

Alberta Law Review Symposium on Indian Law in Canada

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Vol 56, No 3: Law, Justice, and Reconciliation in Post-TRC Canada
PUBLISHED: 2019-03-26

INTRODUCTION

ARTICLES

CASE COMMENT

MHA Nation Tribal Member Effort to Force Secretarial Election over Voting Rights Fails

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Cross v. Dept. of Interior (D. Ariz.):

1-complaint-1.pdf

10-motion-to-dismiss.pdf

11-response.pdf

12-reply.pdf

18-dct-order.pdf

65ibia089.pdf

65ibia157.pdf

Request for Information on Tribal Government Responses to #MeToo

Ann Tweedy

I am an attorney, adjunct professor, and scholar conducting research on tribal responses to #MeToo. If you know of Tribes that have adopted personnel policies or code provisions in response to the #MeToo movement and are able to send me information or links to the relevant provisions, I would greatly appreciate it. You can reach me at ann at anntweedy.com. Thank you in advance!

Arizona Attorney Indian Law Edition

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

SPECIAL FEATURE
  1. Indian Law Special Focus
  2. ICWA and Assisted Reproductive Technology BY DAUNE CARDENAS
  3. Environmental Justice in Indian Country BY BETHANY SULLIVAN
  4. Energy Development on Tribal Land BY PILAR M. THOMAS
  5. Domestic Violence Criminal Jurisdiction BY OJ FLORES
  6. Leaving the Office Ethically BY VIRJINYA TORREZ
  7. 2020 Census Challenge BY JAMES THOMAS TUCKER
  8. The Year of the Native Voter BY SARAH CRAWFORD
  9. Tribute to Rodney B. Lewis BY JAMES THOMAS TUCKER