U.S. Tax Court Decides Miccosukee Tribe v. Commissioner

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Opinion

An excerpt:

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Appeals Office sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) with respect to notices of Federal tax lien (NFTLs) and a notice of intent to levy filed to collect petitioner’s unpaid tax liabilities for tax years ended December 31, 2000 through 2005. The sole issue for decision is whether the Appeals Office abused its discretion by sustaining the lien and levy actions for these years. We hold that it did not.

Reported ICWA Notice Case out of California

Kate Fort

Here

Here, the juvenile court properly inquired about Shahida’s Indian ancestry at each hearing, and the Department conscientiously interviewed several family members to obtain additional information. During these family interviews, the maternal great uncle informed the Department he had Creek and Seminole ancestry. The maternal grandmother also informed the Department she believed, based at least in part on photographs she no longer possessed, she had Blackfeet ancestry. The court found the Blackfeet claim insufficiently supported and, according to the Department, the Creek and Seminole ancestry too remote.
Neither explanation proffered by the court and the Department constitutes an adequate ground for failure to give notice of Kadence’s dependency case to the identified tribes. As to the remoteness of Kadence’s possible connection to the Seminole and Creek tribes, although the suggestion of Creek and Seminole ancestry was based on information about her great-great-great grandparents, nothing was presented to the juvenile court or included in the record on appeal concerning the membership rules for those tribes. It could well be, for example, that membership under tribal rules is passed to successive generations, as a matter of right, through bilineal or double descent without regard to intermarriage or blood quantum and that the absence of formal enrollment does not affect tribal membership. Under those circumstances Kadence could be an Indian child within the meaning of ICWA.(See Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez (1978) 436 U.S. 49, 72, fn. 21 [98 S.Ct. 1670, 56 L.Ed.2d 106 [Indian tribe is final arbiter of its membership rights] . . .

Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation Tribal Government Openings

Sarah M Donnelly

11/3/15 Legal secretary posting here.

10/27/15 Legislative coordinator posting (Revised) here.

 

Federal Court Holds ERISA Abrogates Tribal Immunity

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Coppe v. Sac & Fox Casino Healthcare Plan (D. Kan.):

32 Motion to Dismiss

34 Opposition

37 Reply

47 DCT Order

An excerpt:

The statutory language of ERISA in 29 U.S.C. § 1002(32) demonstrates that Congress specifically intended for Indian tribes to maintain sovereign immunity for some employee benefit plans and to abrogate it for others. The language makes it clear that the exemption from the requirements of ERISA applies if all the employees in the plan established by an Indian tribe are “in the performance of essential governmental functions but not in the performance of commercial activities [whether or not an essential government function].”

Congress’s 2006 amendments to ERISA constitute an unequivocal waiver of sovereign immunity for tribal employee plans that perform commercialfunctions. Even before those amendments, circuit courts found ERISA applicable to Indian tribes whose employees performed non-governmental functions. Lumber Indus. Pension Fund v. Warm Springs Forest Prods. Indus., 939 F.2d 683 (9th Cir. 1991); Smart, 868 F.2d at 929.

Navajo Nation Department of Justice Hiring 2016 Summer Interns

Kate Fort

Here

The Navajo Nation Department of Justice Litigation and Employment Unit is looking to hire summer interns for Summer 2016. The Navajo Nation Department of Justice provides legal services to the different governmental entities of the Navajo Nation Government. The Litigation and Employment Unit represents the Nation’s interests in employment and labor cases as well as in other matters in which the interests of the Navajo Nation government are implicated.

Native American Disability Law Center Job Posting

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Attorney Position

Farmington or Gallup, New Mexico

 

The Law Center provides legal services to Native Americans with disabilities living on or near the Navajo & Hopi reservations.  Our offices are located in Farmington and Gallup, New Mexico; however, we serve a broad area around the Four Corners Region of Utah, Arizona, and New Mexico.  Attorneys represent clients in administrative hearings, and tribal, state and federal court actions – with a focus on systemic change. Attorneys also work with tribal governments on legislation & policies effecting individuals with disabilities.  Applicants must have a demonstrable interest in issues facing individuals with disabilities & a willingness to work with the community & non-attorney staff.

 

The Law Center provides exciting opportunities to address issues of first impression & to develop law in Indian Country. The Law Center works closely with the Navajo & Hopi communities to develop law that protects the rights of Navajo & Hopis with disabilities.

 

Admission to the Utah, Arizona, or New Mexico Bar is preferred. Because of high level of independence & responsibility, over 4 years of experience is also preferred.  Willingness to take the next available state and tribal bar exam is required.

 

Salary: Depends upon experience.

Excellent benefits, including full health care, generous leave & flexible scheduling.

 

If interested, please submit cover letter, resume, & writing sample to:

 

Therese E. Yanan

Co-Director of Program Services

Native American Disability Law Center

3535 E. 30th Street, Suite 201

Farmington, New Mexico 87402

505/566-5880

tyanan@nativedisabilitylaw.org

“American Indian police departments to get access to federal criminal databases”

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here.

What an insane world we live in where only 10 tribal police departments may access this database, and even then only through a pilot project.

Northwestern University Founds “Indigenous Studies Research Initiative”

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the details.

This is in partial response to the university’s founder’s role in the Sand Creek Massacre.

Dakota Plains Legal Services Job Posting

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

STAFF ATTORNEY – MISSION, SOUTH DAKOTA

DAKOTA PLAINS LEGAL SERVICES (DPLS), a non-profit legal services program, is accepting applications for a Staff Attorney position in our Mission, South Dakota, branch office.  The Mission office serves the Rosebud Sioux Indian Reservation in South Dakota and Gregory, Jones, Mellette, Todd and Tripp counties in South Dakota.

QUALIFICATIONS/RESPONSIBILITIES: Applicants must have a JD degree and be licensed to practice in South Dakota, or willing and qualified to take the next South Dakota Bar Exam; must be a bright, motivated, self-starter; must have the tenacity to assume immediate practice responsibilities, including handling a significant caseload touching on many different areas of law with regular appearances in court; must demonstrate an interest in poverty law and working with Native American and low income clients; and must commit to a minimum of a two year employment period, upon completion of a six month probationary period.

SALARY: Competitive, depending on experience.  DPLS has an excellent fringe benefits package including generous leave benefits and employee insurance coverage (medical, dental, life, disability).

CLOSING DATE: Open until filled.

APPLICATION INFORMATION:  Please submit a letter of interest and resume to:

 

John J. Buchy, Executive Director

Dakota Plains Legal Services

PO Box 727

Mission, SD 57555

(605) 856-4444

dpls1@gwtc.net

 

Native Americans, Women and Minorities are encouraged to apply.  Dakota Plains Legal Services is an Equal Opportunity Employer.

Hopi Tribal Court Decision in Lomayesva v. Talayumptewa — Matter Involving Termination of General Counsel

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Final Order and Opinion CASE NO. 2015-CV-0088

An excerpt:

In short, the Tribal Council must follow its own laws, and not conveniently “re-interpret” a Hopi Tribal Council Resolution when the political winds change. Here, not one notion of Hopi fundamental fairness, not one attempt at due process, and not a single attempt to provide notice and an opportunity to be heard can be gleaned from the record and testimony before this Court. If this Court were to endorse and condone this abrogation of Hopi law, then all of the Hopi Tribe, the Hopi people, would suffer a terrible precedent in the Hopi way of life. 

This is not to say that Plaintiff cannot be terminated. He does not have a lifetime expectation of employment under any circumstance that may arise. Rather, the Employee Manual must be followed properly as required by the Resolution. Hopi law must be respected. If Tribal Council wishes to remove and terminate Plaintiff’s employment, it must follow the terms of the Resolution that the Hopi Tribal Council, on its own accord, adopted.