D.C. Circuit Briefs in Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon v. Jewell (Cowlitz Tribe)

Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here:

Grand Ronde Opening Brief

Clark County Opening Brief

Federal Answer Brief

Samish Amicus Brief

Cowlitz Brief

USET Amicus Brief

Clark County Reply

Grand Ronde Reply

Lower court materials here.

SCOTUS Schedules Oral Argument in Menominee (Dec. 1) and Dollar General (Dec. 7)

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here.

Ninth Circuit Briefs in Agua Caliente Band Water Rights Case

Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here are the briefs in Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians v. Coachella Valley Water District:

Water Districts Opening Brief

Agua Caliente Brief

US Briefpdf

2016-02-18 – Dkt 035-1 – Brief Amicus Curiae of the SCA Tribal Chairmen’s Association, et al. in Support of Appellees

2016-02-18 – Dkt 036 – Brief of Amici Curiae Law Professors in Support of Appellee

Reply

Lower court materials here, here, and here.

New Bibliography on Indian Treaties

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Beth DiFelice has published “Indian Treaties: A Bibliography” (PDF) (SSRN) in the Law Library Journal.

Cert Opposition Brief in Jensen v. EXC

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

EXC Cert Opp

Cert petition is here.

Congrats, Whitney Gravelle and Alayna Farris! 2015 Summer Clerks’ work recognized by NARF

Singel
Alayna Farris, Whitney Gravelle, and John Echohawk recognize the donation from the Confederated Tribes of Siletz
Alayna Farris, Whitney Gravelle, and John Echohawk recognize the donation from the Confederated Tribes of Siletz

At the Indigenous Law & Policy Center, we’re very proud of the work of current and past MSU College of Law Students. This week, Whitney Gravelle (MSU COL ’16, Anishinaabe from the Bay Mills Indian Community) was featured in an update from NARF.  Whitney and her summer clerk colleague, Alayna Farris from the University of Arkansas School of Law, worked on several matters, including the revision and updating of A Compilation of Federal and State Education Laws regarding Native Language in Curriculum and Certification of Teachers in Native Languages.   Their work at NARF this summer was made possible by a grant from the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians and the Siletz Tribal Charitable Contribution Fund.

More information is available here.

Although the deadline for the NARF Summer 2016 Clerkship program has passed,  interested first year law students should research this excellent opportunity and prepare to apply in the early fall of 2016 for the Summer 2017 Clerkship program.

Whitney Gravelle at NARF
Whitney Gravelle at NARF

Jasmine Abdel-Khalik on Disparaging Trademarks

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Jasmine Abdel-Khalik has posted “Disparaging Trademarks: Who Matters,” published in the Michigan Journal of Race & Law. Here is the abstract:

For more than a century, non-majority groups have protested the use of trademarks comprised of or containing terms referencing the group — albeit for various reasons. For those trademarks that are offensive to targeted groups, some may argue that the market will solve. In other words, some may assume that purchasers in the marketplace will respect the objection, there will be insufficient purchases of the product under the mark, and the mark will disappear. However, objections raised by smaller populations in the United States often fall on deaf ears, and the marks continue to be used in the marketplace. The Washington NFL football team trademarks are an example.

Under the 1946 Lanham Act, Congress added a prohibition against registering disparaging trademarks, which could offer protection to non-majority groups targeted by the use of trademarks offensive to members of the group. The prohibition remained relatively unclear, however, and relatively rarely applied in that context until a group of Native Americans petitioned to cancel the Washington NFL team’s trademarks as either scandalous (meaning offensive to the general population) or disparaging (meaning offensive to the referenced group). In clarifying the appropriate test for disparaging, however, the decision makers have overly analogizing the two prohibitions, rendering the disparaging registration prohibition less effective in protecting non-majority groups from offensive trademarks.

This Article seeks to clarify the history, purpose, and utilization of the disparaging registration prohibition. In so doing, the Article also seeks to detangle the scandalous and disparaging registration prohibitions and refocus the disparaging registration prohibition on a broader and necessary purpose, which is to protect non-majority voices from the numerous harms caused by stereotyping and by rendering painful terms commonplace but no less painful.