Navajo Sues Interior over FY2017 Judicial Contract

Here is the complaint in Navajo Nation v. Dept. of Interior (D.D.C.):

Complaint

An excerpt:

Plaintiff Navajo Nation (“Nation”) seeks relief for Defendants’ violations of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act, as amended, 25 U.S.C. § 5301 et seq. (“ISDEAA”), and regulations promulgated thereunder, and for Defendants’ breach of a self-determination contract made under the ISDEAA. Under the ISDEAA and governing regulations, Defendants may not decline an Indian tribe’s renewal proposal for a self-determination contract, or contract funding, if it is substantially the same as the prior contract. The Nation submitted a renewal proposal to the Department of the Interior (“Department”) for their contract covering operations of the Navajo Nation Judicial Branch that proposed funding in the amount of $17,055,477 for calendar year (“CY”) 2017. This was the same amount that the Nation sought for CY 2016 and was essentially the same amount that the Nation had previously sought for CY 2014 and CY 2015 ($17,055,517) and which had been approved by operation of law because of Defendants’ failure to decline the Nation’sCY 2014 funding proposal within the 90-day review period established by law. Nonetheless, Defendants partially declined the Nation’s renewal proposal for all funding in excess of $1,429,177.00 for CY 2017. Because Defendants’ action violates the ISDEAA and applicable regulations, the Nation is entitled to declaratory and injunctive relief and damages.

ETP Spills Two Million Gallons of Drilling Material in Ohio

Energy Transfer Partners’ Rover Pipeline construction spill mucks up Ohio wetlands

 

HERE.

Federal Court Dismisses Nooksack v. Zinke; Plaintiff Lacks Standing as “Nooksack Tribe”

Here are the materials in Nooksack Indian Tribe v. Zinke (W.D. Wash.):

19 – Nooksack Tribe’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction

26 – Federal Defendants’ Opposition to Preliminary Injunction Motion and Cross-Motion to Dismiss

29 – Nooksack Tribe’s Reply in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction

36 – Nooksack Tribe’s Response in Opposition to Federal Defendants’ Cross-Motion to Dismiss or for Summary Judgment

39 – Secretary’s Reply re Motion to Dismiss

43 – Order Granting Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss

44 – Judgment

Bears Ears Comment Period Is Open and Closes May 26

As we wrote last week, the comment period for Bears Ears is fifteen days long after the notice was issued.

Here is the notice. We’ve written on submitting effective comments before here. Comment period ends on 5/26.

h/t S.K.

Federal Court Dismisses FTCA Claim Arising from Hot Oil Burn at Indian School

Here are the materials in Lightning Fire v. United States (D.S.D.):

20 Motion to Dismiss

28 Response

32 Reply

34 DCT Order

First Guilty Plea in Winnebago Tribal Council Embezzlement Indictments

Here are the materials so far in United States v. Blackhawk (D. Neb.):

1 Indictments

129 Payer Plea Agreement

TruthOut: “Trump’s Remark on Andrew Jackson Was a Dog Whistle for White Nationalists”

Here.

Seminole Tribe Prevails in Tribal Court Exhaustion Matter

Here are the materials in Asker v. Seminole Tribe of Florida (S.D. Fla.):

Askar Seminole [DE 42] Def. Seminole Ct. Resp. in Opp. to M. to Vacate

Defendant’s, the Seminole Tribe of Florida Trial Court, Motion to Dismiss

Defendant’s, The Seminole Tribe of Florida Trial Court, Response in Opposition

Order of Dismissal Without Prejudice

Order on Motion to Vacate

Fourth Circuit Rejects Western Sky-Related Claims

Here are the materials in Dillon v. BMO Harris Bank:

Opinion

Opening Brief

Response Brief

Reply Brief

Lower court materials here.