Here are the materials in Redding Rancheria v. Hargan (D.D.C.):
31-1 US Motion for Summary Judgment
34-1 Rancheria Motion for Summary Judgment
Here are the materials in Redding Rancheria v. Hargan (D.D.C.):
31-1 US Motion for Summary Judgment
34-1 Rancheria Motion for Summary Judgment
En banc stage materials:
Eastern Shoshone Tribe En Banc Petition
Northern Arapaho Tribe En Banc Petition
Panel materials here.
Here:
Question presented:
Whether the judicial doctrine of tribal sovereign immunity bars civil claims against an Indian tribe based on its intentional torts and criminal conduct that occurred off-reservation against non-members of the tribe.
Lower court materials here.
Update:
Here is the modified opinion in Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah v. Lawrence.
En banc petition stage materials here:
Panel materials here.
Here is the order in Mylan Pharmaceuticals v. St. Regis Mohawk Tribe:
Links: Public Meeting Announcement(PDF), previous posts
The court will hold public meetings in Monticello and Bluff to receive public input on proposed preliminary County Commission and School Board election districts.
Meeting Details:
Date: Thursday, November 16, 2017
Time: 10:30 am – 12:30 pm
Location: Hideout Community Center, 49 West 600 South St, Monticello, UT 84535
Date: Thursday, November 16, 2017
Time: 3:30 pm – 5:30 pm
Location: Bluff Community Center, 3rd East and Mulberry, Bluff Rd, Bluff, UT 84512
Here.
An excerpt, and a little horn tooting:
The most telling argument for the government is the recitation (in an amicus brief filed by a group of law professors) of the dozens of statutes Congress has adopted through the centuries resolving Indian land disputes and dealing high-handedly with Indian lands. It is notable that Bank Markazi emphasized Congress’ supreme authority over foreign affairs in its rejection of the Klein claim in that case. Congress’ plenary authority to regulate and protect Indian tribes leaves room for a similar resolution of this case without explicitly rejecting the Klein rule. Bank Markazi of course said nothing about Congress’s power over Indian affairs, so that result wouldn’t really follow from Bank Markazi. It would, though, afford the justices a way to decide the case narrowly, which seems to have been their goal in these cases. The key thing to watch for in the argument will be any sense that any of the members of the Bank Markazi majority show a willingness to treat this case differently than they did that one.
You can read that amicus brief here, along with the rest of the briefs
Here is the complaint and press release in Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation v. Klickikat County (E.D. Wash.):

You must be logged in to post a comment.