Here are the materials in Alexander v. Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde :
Alexander v. Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde Opinion
Alexander v. Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde Opening Brief
Alexander v. Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde Appellees’ Brief
Alexander v. Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde Petitioners’ Reply Brief
Here:
The National Indian Law Library added new content to the Indian Law Bulletins on 8/5/16.
U.S. Supreme Court Bulletin
http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/sct/2015-2016update.html
Petition for certiorari was filed on 7/13/16 in Jones v. Norton (Wrongful Death)
U.S. Courts of Appeals Bulletin
http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/cta/2016cta.html
United States v. Lamott (Violence Against Women Act)
United States v. Alvirez (Crimes – Indian Status)
Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde Community of Oregon v. Jewell (Land into Trust; Recognized Indian Tribe under Federal Jurisdiction)
U.S. Federal Trial Courts Bulletin
http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/dct/2016dct.html
Brakebill v. Jaeger (Voting Rights – ID Requirements)
Littlefield v. Department of Interior (Land into Trust – Federal Acquisition)
Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians v. Snyder (Reservation Diminishment)
State Courts Bulletin
http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/state/2016state.html
Findleton v. Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians (Sovereign Immunity – Construction Contracts)
Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Schinneller (Sovereign Immunity; Personal Injury – Slip and Fall)
News Bulletin
http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/news/currentnews.html
In the Economic Development and Intergovernmental sections, we feature articles about tribal marijuana businesses.
U.S. Legislation Bulletin
http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/legislation/114_uslegislation.html
One new bill was added:
H.R.5926: Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2017. See TITLE III DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION: INDIAN EDUCATION.
Law Review & Bar Journal Bulletin
http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/lawreviews/2016lr.html
These articles were added:
Tribal leakage: How the curse of trust land impedes tribal economic self-sustainability.
Biagaweit: securing water from the mighty river in the Snake River Basin Adjudication.
What is the federal reserved water rights doctrine, really? Answering this question in Idaho’s Snake River Basin Adjudication.
U.S. Regulatory Bulletin
http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/regulatory/2016fr.html
We feature a notice from the Bureau of Census relating to tribal consultation meetings being held across the U.S. to get feedback on the 2020 census.
QUESTIONS PRESENTED
1. Whether the Court of Appeals erred in holding, in the first federal
or state appellate decision to directly consider the question, that an Indian
tribe has not been divested of its inherent authority to prosecute a tribal
member for an offense occurring outside of its Indian country when
necessary to protect tribal self-government or to control internal relations.
2. Whether the Court of Appeals erred in holding that established fair
notice principles are not violated by a tribal court’s decision that tribal law
allows for the exercise of jurisdiction over a tribal member, when tribal and
state law clearly proscribed the conduct at issue and multiple provisions of
the tribe’s constitution and laws provided for the exercise of such
jurisdiction.
16-5120 Respondent’s Brief in Opposition
Cert Petition HERE.
Prior posts on Kelsey v. Pope, including lower court materials, HERE.
Here is “Limit Government Intrusion in Indian Families’ Lives.” This essay is part of a series of online essays at Cato Unbound on the Indian Child Welfare Act.
Excerpts:
The Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) restricts government intervention in Indian families’ lives, imposes important obligations on the government that benefit both children and parents when it does interfere, and limits the ease by which private entities profit from government action.
And:
Alexandria P. is a story of how foster parents created an adversarial relationship with a child’s family, disregarding the goal of reunification, and then created a perfect storm of anti-Indian media sentiment when they lost. Some facts should be made clear, in case they are not: Lexi knew and regularly visited her Utah family – her sisters and her aunt and uncle – and she always knew she was a foster child. From the beginning, the California foster couple was the only party to contest Lexi’s placement with her relatives. The state of California, the Choctaw Nation, her relatives, her father, and Lexi’s own counsel all agreed that the placement with her relatives was absolutely in her best interest. Not once did any court disagree.
Finally:
Casual racism against American Indians is alive and well. In this hostile racial climate, it shouldn’t be surprising that Indian parents in South Dakota argue that “there’s this collective belief that Native people can’t take care of their own children.” The critique that ICWA improperly routes Indian children to their relatives’ homes instead of non-Indian homes is a critique that takes advantage of racial animus against Indian people and comes dangerously close to an allegation that Indian parents and tribal communities are inherently inferior (others have outright denounced the Goldwater Institute’s goals for this reason). Indian people love their children the same as everyone else. ICWA, the gold standard in child welfare, is there to support Indian families against governments that too often devalue them.
Here are the materials in the matter of Navajo Nation et al v. Rael et al, 16-cv-00888 (D. N.M. 2016):
Here are the materials in the matter of Navajo Nation et al v. Marsh et al, 15-cv-00799 (D. N.M. 2016):
Doc. 12 – Motion for Summary Judgment
Doc. 13 – Response to Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment
Doc. 17 – McNeal Defendant’s Response in Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment
Doc. 19 – Reply in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment
Doc. 21 – Memorandum Opinion and Order
Link to previously posted complaint here.
Download announcement here.
Several offices are actively involved in issues that affect Native communities. These include the Alaska offices (one in Juneau and one in Anchorage), the Northwest office located in Seattle, the Mid-Pacific regional office in Honolulu, the Rocky Mountain office in Denver, and the Northern Rockies office in Bozeman.
Materials in the matter of Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians of California, et al v. United States Department of Transportation et al, 15-cv-04987 (N.D. Cal. 2016):
Doc. 31 – Federal Defendants’ Notice of Motion and Motion to Dismiss
Doc. 36 – Federal Defendants’ Reply in Support of Their Motion to Dismiss
Doc. 58 – Order Granting Federal Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, with Leave to Amend
Link to previously posted complaint here.
New materials in Galanda v. Nooksack Tribal Court (as of Aug. 3):
In re Gabriel Galanda v Nooksack Tribal Court Response re Order on Motion to Enforce Contempt Order
Recently, the former tribal attorney on the case is now its Chief Judge (Exhibit C in Declaration) and the Police Chief missed yesterday’s show cause deadline.
Link to court order to show cause by Aug. 3 here.
Link to Bellingham Herald coverage from July 29 here.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.