Turtle Talk

Navajo Nation RFP — Treasury Offsets Work

October 31, 2016November 2, 2016Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Corrected notice here.

~~The description:~~

The Navajo Nation seeks assistance in litigation, administrative outreach, and lobbying to assist in matters related to federal administrative offsets made by the U.S. Department of the Treasury for disputed debts. Selected Respondent will provide legal services to secure a favorable outcome of the disputes and will litigate those disputes if necessary. The Navajo Nation Department of Justice will be accepting proposals for this service postmarked by 5:00 PM MT on Wednesday, November 9, 2016. NO LATE PROPOSALS WILL BE ACCEPTED.

Georgia SCT Rules Against Western Sky

October 31, 2016December 9, 2016Matthew L.M. Fletcher

~~Here is the opinion in Western Sky Financial LLC v. State ex rel. Owens~~.

Substitute opinion in Western Sky Financial LLC v. State ex rel. Olens (PDF) (12-8-2016).

Donald Trump and Federal Indian Policy: Postscript

October 31, 2016October 31, 2016bryannewland4 Comments

Back in July, I wrote a commentary post titled Donald Trump and Federal Indian Policy, which put some of Trump’s public statements about Indian tribes and American Indians into context vis-a-vis federal Indian policy. As I explained:

Donald Trump’s most notable comments about Indian tribes – made before the Committee on Natural Resources – reveal that he does not draw the distinction between the racial and political identities of Indian people. His view of the legitimacy of Indian tribes depends on the physical appearance of their members. As he told Don Imus, “it’s just one of those things that we have to straighten out.”

On June 18, 1993, Donald Trump appeared on the Don Imus radio show, Imus in the Morning, to discuss Indian gaming. The full transcript of Trump’s interview is worth reading in full (it is a short read). This interview offers a rare window into Trump’s views about Indian tribes, Indian people, and Indian gaming. Here are a few exchanges:

On the Expansion of Indian Gaming

IMUS: So what is this now? A bunch of drunken Injuns want to open a casino down there in New Jersey?

TRUMP: Well, it’s a battle that we’re fighting and I think it’s being successfully fought. A lot of the reservations are being, in some people’s opinion, at least to a certain extent run by organized crime and organized crime elements, as you can imagine. There’s no protection. There’s no anything. And it’s become a joke. It’s become a laughing joke. And the politicians around 1987 passed a law where the Indians can have virtually unsupervised casino gaming. So we’re in there fighting it and I think we’re making a lot go progress. I think you’ll see some very major things happening over the next couple of months. [NOTE: The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act was passed in 1988, and establishes a three-tiered system for the regulation of gaming by tribal agencies, states, and the National Indian Gaming Commission]

On the Sovereign Status of Indian Tribes

TRUMP: They call it the sovereign nation. They call it a nation, this great sovereign nation, the Indian tribes. All of a sudden, it’s nations.

Before it wasn’t a nation, before gambling. Now, it’s this great sovereign nation. We protect, we do this, we do that, but when it comes to gambling, it’s a sovereign nation.

So it’s really a double standard and no taxes are paid. No supervision’s there, tremendous crime, and most of the Indians don’t want it themselves. The leaders – you know, all chiefs and no Indians, and the leaders want it for the obvious reason, but I think it’s something that’s going to end or is certainly going to be supervised very, very stringently.

On Tribal Membership

IMUS: Would there be any reason, if push comes to shove, for you to become a member of these tribes?

TRUMP: Well I think if we lost various things, I would perhaps become an Indian myself….Well, I think I might have more Indian blood than a lot of the so-called Indians that are trying to open up the reservations.

On Gaming as an “Indian problem”

IMUS: Yeah, but are you getting married?

TRUMP: That might be the most difficult question you’ve asked me so far. See, the Indian problem is a much simpler problem. That can be solved.

You can read the entire transcript here: trump-on-imus-1993

FBA’s November Indian Law Conference Next Friday

Image October 28, 2016October 28, 2016Ann Tweedy

Attorney Alan Stay on the Culverts Decision

October 28, 2016October 28, 2016Ann Tweedy

Here. My colleague Alan Stay was integrally involved in bringing the first treaty habitat case in U.S. v. WA, so this article makes for an interesting read.

Friday Job Announcements

October 28, 2016Sarah M Donnelly

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.

Galanda Broadman PLLC

Associate Attorney, Seattle, WA.

Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe

Senior Associate General Counsel, Mt. Pleasant, MI.

Associate General Counsel, Mt. Pleasant, MI.

Tohono O’odham Nation

Assistant Attorney General, IV Health, Sells, AZ. At least eight years of relevant experience, including experience in health law. The Office of Attorney General represents the interests of the Tohono O’odham Nation in tribal, state, and federal venues. The Nation offers generous benefits including paid holidays, sick and annual leave, low cost medical, dental, and vision insurance. Applicants must pass a background check. Send resume, legal writing sample, and three references to Acting Attorney General Laura Berglan via email at laura.berglan@tonation-nsn.gov.

University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law

Program Specialist, Indigenous Peoples Law & Policy, Tuscon, AZ. Review begins Tuesday, November 8, 2016.

NJ Lenni-Lenape Tribe’s Claims against State Proceed

October 28, 2016October 28, 2016Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Nanticoke Lenni-Lenape Tribal Nation v. Lougy (D. N.J.):

39-1 Motion to Dismiss

40 Opposition

41 Reply

50 DCT Order

Public Land & Resources Law Review Call for Papers

October 28, 2016October 28, 2016Sarah M Donnelly

The Public Land & Resources Law Review is currently accepting submissions for potential publication in the upcoming issue, our 38th volume. Helmed by students at the Alexander Blewett III School of Law at the University of Montana, the Public Land & Resources Law Review serves as a vital resource providing high quality articles on issues relevant to public land, natural resources, environmental, and federal Indian law for practitioners and scholars across the country. The Public Land and Resources Law Review accepts articles and abstracts for consideration from students, practitioners, and law school faculty members.

If you are interested in submitting an article, please contact Maresa Jenson, Publication Editor, at maresa.jenson@umconnect.umt.edu, by February 15, 2017. Articles will be considered on a rolling basis. We look forward to working with you to publish your scholarship.

Sincerely,

Editors of the Public Land & Resources Law Review

Washington Supreme Court Explicitly Rejects Existing Indian Family Exception

October 27, 2016October 27, 2016Kate Fort2 Comments

Here

In only the third Washington Supreme Court case to directly interpret ICWA and the first to interpret WICWA, the Court holds In re Crews (the case that established EIF in Washington) is overturned.

Under our above interpretation of ICWA and WICWA, if a case (1) meets the definition of a “child custody proceeding” and (2) involves an Indian child, both acts shall apply. ICWA and WICWA recognize only two exceptions to coverage–delinquency
proceedings and custody disputes following divorce where one parent retains custody of the Indian child. Our interpretation therefore overrules Crews to the extent that it embraced the existing Indian family exception because it recognizes no additional exceptions to coverage outside of the two expressly stated in ICWA and WICWA.

ICWA and WICWA also apply based on the child’s membership, not the parent’s:

For these reasons, we hold that whether the parent whose rights are being terminated is non-Indian is immaterial to a finding that ICWA and WICWA apply. If the child at issue is an Indian child and that child is involved in a child custody proceeding, ICWA and WICWA shall apply.

Craig Dorsay represented the tribal amicus brief (including oral arguments), and NARF and Indian Law Clinic at MSU Law provided strategy and research support in this case. Previous coverage here.