If you don’t use these, I will find out and talk about it in one of my presentations when I’m in your state. Or when I’m in other states. I travel a lot. Print them out and use them PLEASE:
Federal Lawyer Indian Law Issue 2017
Here:
The Rapidly Increasing Extraction of Oil, and Native Women, in North Dakota
During the past year, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and allies made national news as they gathered in prayerful ceremony at the confluence of the Missouri and Cannonball Rivers to stop the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline project in North Dakota. The pipeline threatens the tribe’s drinking water, sacred sites, and burial grounds, and, as a result, much attention has been paid to the potential environmental and cultural impacts of the pipeline. Little to no focus, however, has been given to the proposed pipeline’s impacts on the safety of Native women and children living in the Bakken region of North Dakota.
During the past year, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and allies made national news as they gathered in prayerful ceremony at the confluence of the Missouri and Cannonball Rivers to stop the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline project in North Dakota. The pipeline threatens the tribe’s drinking water, sacred sites, and burial grounds, and, as a result, much attention has been paid to the potential environmental and cultural impacts of the pipeline. Little to no focus, however, has been given to the proposed pipeline’s impacts on the safety of Native women and children living in the Bakken region of North Dakota.
Statutory Divestiture of Tribal Sovereignty
The Supreme Court’s non-decision in Dollar General v. Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians is evidence not only of disagreement on tribal civil jurisdiction but perhaps also uncertainty in how to analyze divestiture of tribal sovereignty. Most scholars (including myself) have described the Court’s behavior in tribal sovereign authority cases as one of judicial supremacy, in that the Court merely makes policy choices based on its own ideological views of tribal power.
The Supreme Court’s non-decision in Dollar General v. Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians is evidence not only of disagreement on tribal civil jurisdiction but perhaps also uncertainty in how to analyze divestiture of tribal sovereignty. Most scholars (including myself) have described the Court’s behavior in tribal sovereign authority cases as one of judicial supremacy, in that the Court merely makes policy choices based on its own ideological views of tribal power.
Breaking Faith With the Tribal Sovereignty Doctrine
The great Seneca Nation leader and diplomat Red Jacket is said to have illustrated the tribe’s frustration with the insatiable encroachment of those seeking Seneca lands during a negotiation with the Holland Land Company’s agent, Joseph Ellicott. The two were seated on a log.
The great Seneca Nation leader and diplomat Red Jacket is said to have illustrated the tribe’s frustration with the insatiable encroachment of those seeking Seneca lands during a negotiation with the Holland Land Company’s agent, Joseph Ellicott. The two were seated on a log.
Tribes and Cannabis: Seeking Parity with States and Consultation and Agreement from the U.S. Government
Sales of legal cannabis reached nearly $7 billion in 2016 and are expected to eclipse $20 billion by 2021. Despite their efforts, and an overarching trust obligation owed by the U.S. government to Indian nations, American Indian tribes adopting state “go-it-alone” models of cannabis legalization have failed to receive parity in treatment with states on cannabis issues and have been met with threats or actions by law enforcement.
Sales of legal cannabis reached nearly $7 billion in 2016 and are expected to eclipse $20 billion by 2021. Despite their efforts, and an overarching trust obligation owed by the U.S. government to Indian nations, American Indian tribes adopting state “go-it-alone” models of cannabis legalization have failed to receive parity in treatment with states on cannabis issues and have been met with threats or actions by law enforcement.
The Rights of Indian Children ABA Article
The tribe I worked for decided to “bring the children home” through a focus on children in their community and ensuring resources to support that work. Many strategies were employed, depending on case specifics. Ensuring the tribal children were closer to home, both in proximity and culturally, was the goal. Some cases achieved the goal through reunification with the natural parents, others by placement within kinship care from stranger foster care. One of the primary practices was the transfer of cases to tribal court when the parents were amenable. In the end we brought all but one child back into tribal custody with an over 75 percent kinship placement rate.
GAO Report on Human Trafficking of Indigenous Women
Summary:
All four federal agencies that investigate or prosecute human trafficking in Indian country—the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices (USAO)—are required to record in their case management systems whether a human trafficking offense was involved in the case. With the exception of ICE, these agencies are also required to record in their case management systems whether the crime took place in Indian country. ICE officials explained that the agency does not record this information because, unlike BIA and the FBI, ICE is not generally involved in criminal investigations in Indian country. Typically, ICE would only conduct an investigation in Indian country if specifically invited by a tribe to do so. Further, with the exception of BIA, these agencies do not require their agents or attorneys to collect or record Native American status of victims in their cases due to concerns about victim privacy and lack of relevance of the victim’s race to the substance of the investigation or prosecution.
The Departments of Justice (DOJ), Health and Human Services (HHS), and Homeland Security (DHS) administered at least 50 grant programs from fiscal years 2013 through 2016 that could help address Native American human trafficking. For example, 21 of these grant programs, which were administered by DOJ and HHS, could be used to provide services to Native American human trafficking victims. However, the total number of Native American victims who received services under these grant programs is unknown. HHS is developing a data collection tool that grantees can use to report information on human trafficking victims served, including Native American status of victims. DOJ’s Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) requires grantees to report Native American status of victims served, but not by type of crime. DOJ’s Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) do not require grantees to collect and report Native American status of victims served. However, in fiscal year 2017, OVC began providing recipients of human trafficking-specific grant programs the option to report the race or Native American status of victims served. While Native American status may not generally be a factor for determining whether a victim can receive services, it may be a factor for determining how best to assist this particular demographic. According to the 2013-2017 Federal Strategic Action Plan on Services for Victims of Human Trafficking in the United States, expanding human trafficking data collection and research efforts for Native Americans and other vulnerable populations is an area for improvement for the federal government. Additionally, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government states that quality information should be used to achieve objectives based on relevant data from reliable sources. Without collecting data on the Native American status of victims served, federal agencies will not know the extent to which they are achieving government-wide strategic goals to provide and improve services to vulnerable populations, including Native American human trafficking victims.
House Resources Committee Chair Demands BIA Reverse Obama Administration Gaming Decisions
Michelle Bryan on Sacred Water within Prior Appropriation
Michelle Bryan has posted “Valuing Tribal Sacred Water within Prior Appropriation,” published in the Natural Resources Journal. Here is an excerpt from the abstract:
Much has been written in the area of waters to support fishing rights under treaty. This article does not address these rights, but rather focuses on the sacred nature of the water resource itself. While the two may be complementary, a sacred water use may also exist separate from a recognized treaty fishing right. There are other places where these values should further be reflected, such as federal lands management plans, local land development codes, and environmental assessment review. This piece, however, will focus on the notable absence of sacred value within prior appropriation. This shift is important not only for the legal protections it might afford, but just as importantly as a signal that our water laws can stretch to protect the many interests of our time.
Fed Bar Panel on Energy and DAPL: What’s Next for Tribes
Call for Presentations and Papers: 37th Public Land Law Conference
Download(PDF): Announcement
The PUBLIC LAND & RESOURCES LAW REVIEW invites submissions for panelist presentations at its 37th Public Land Law Conference, Bridging Divides: Energy, Environment, and Empowerment in a New Era. The conference will be held at the Alexander Blewett III School of Law at the University of Montana in beautiful Missoula, Montana. Our invited keynote speaker is U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke.
Friday Job Announcements
Job vacancies are posted on Friday. Some announcements might still appear throughout the week. If you would like your Indian law job posted on Turtle Talk, please email indigenous@law.msu.edu.
DNA People Legal Services
Staff Attorney/Project Administrator, Fort Defiance, AZ. The NARF Criminal Grant ends September 30, 2017, due to the length of time left on the grant (5mos), this person will only be responsible for Quarterly Reporting. This person will be 80% Staff Attorney and 20% Project Administrator with additional pay. The deadline for submission is Friday, April 21, 2017.
Other vacancies, including Development Director, Staff Attorney at Farmington and Shiprock, Staff Attorney at Tuba City and Flagstaff, MLP Attorney at Tuba City, Americorps Member.
Squaxin Island Tribe
Staff Attorney, Olympia area, WA. The Legal Department advises and represents the Squaxin Island Tribe in federal, Tribal and state courts and in administrative proceedings. The work environment is collegial, collaborative and dynamic, and with an emphasis on creative problem-solving. We seek qualified individuals with top-notch skills. The position will remain open until filled, but first review of applications will occur after April 17, 2017.
Falmouth Institute
Adjunct Faculty, Fairfax, VA. Are you looking to share your knowledge and expand your reputation in Indian Country? Falmouth Institute, the premier provider of culturally relevant education and information services for North American Indian tribes and organizations, is seeking adjunct faculty to teach 2-day and 3-day courses in applied Indian law. Subjects include Employment Law; FLSA & FMLA; Family Law in Indian Country; Indian Land and the Law; Indian Self-Determination Act; Jurisdiction in Indian Country; Protecting Confidential Tribal Records; Rights of Way Over Indian Land; Self Governance; The Essentials of Indian Law; Understanding the Federal Tort Claims Act for Tribal Organizations; Wills, Probate and Land Consolidation in Indian Country; and Zoning on Indian Land. Courses are held in Las Vegas, Albuquerque, and Seattle, as well as on-site for clients. If you have in-depth knowledge of Indian law and a passion for teaching others, write to basla.andolsun@falmouthinstitute.com to apply.
National Indian Law Library Bulletin (4/5/2017)
Here:
The National Indian Law Library added new content to the Indian Law Bulletins on 4/5/17.
U.S. Supreme Court Bulletin
http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/sct/2016-2017update.html
Petition was denied in Citizens Against Reservation Shopping v. Jewell (Land into Trust; Recognized Indian Tribe) on 4/3/17.
Read the latest Tribal Supreme Court Project update published on 4/4/17.
U.S. Federal Courts Bulletin
http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/federal/2017.html
United States v. Jackson (Indian Reservation Diminishment)
United States v. Washington (Treaty Right to Fish – Culverts)
Rosebud Sioux Tribe v. United States (Indian Health Care Improvement Act)
Pauma Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the Pauma & Yuima Reservation v. California (Indian Gaming Compact, Breach of)
Davilla v. Enable Midstream Partners, L.P. (Trespass – Natural Gas Pipeline)
Skokomish Indian Tribe v. Forsman (Treaty Right to Hunt; Tribal Sovereign Immunity)
Dahlstrom v. Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe (Tribal Sovereign Immunity)
Robinson v. Jewell (pro se action on behalf of a Tribe)
Tribal Courts Bulletin
http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/tribal/2016.html
Fryberg v. Tulalip Tribes Housing Department (Housing – Eviction)
C.W. v. The Tulalip Tribe (Employment)
Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians v. Martin (Domestic Violence)
Leggins v. Fort Peck Tribes (Child Neglect)
State Courts Bulletin
http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/state/2017.html
Cougar Den, Inc. v. Washington State Department of Licensing (Treaty Right to Travel – Fuel Transport Taxation)
People In Interest of L.L. (Indian Child Welfare Act – Notice)
U.S. Regulatory Bulletin
http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/regulatory/2017.html
The Department of Interior, Office of Natural Resources Revenue, has issued proposed rules relating to consolidated federal oil & gas and federal & Indian coal valuation reform.
News Bulletin
http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/news/currentnews.html
In the Environment & Energy section, we feature articles about possible Trump environmental policy impacts on tribes.
Law Review & Bar Journal Bulletin
http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/lawreviews/2017.html
The following articles were added:
Batman and two very large jars of mayonnaise: The looming clash of daily fantasy sports and tribal gaming.
VAWA 2013’s right to appointed counsel in tribal court proceedings—a rising tide that lifts all boats or a procedural windfall for non-Indian defendants?
Community-scale solar: Watt’s in it for Indian Country?
U.S. Legislation Bulletin
http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/legislation/115_uslegislation.html
Three bills were added:
S.772: A bill to amend the PROTECT Act to make Indian tribes eligible for AMBER Alert grants.
H.R.610: To distribute Federal funds for elementary and secondary education in the form of vouchers for eligible students and to repeal a certain rule relating to nutrition standards in schools.
S.780: A bill to amend the Controlled Substances Act to reduce the gap between Federal and State marijuana policy, and for other purposes.
S.747: Special Diabetes Program for Indians (SDPI) Reauthorization.
S.785: A bill to amend the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act to provide for equitable allotment of land to Alaska Native veterans.
H.R.23: Gaining Responsibility on Water (GROW) Act of 2017
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.