amicus briefs – Page 2

I am writing to you to express the Gila River Indian Community’s concerns regarding the Brief Amici Curiae of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and Experienced Tribal Court Litigators in Support of Respondent (“Brief’) recently filed with the Supreme Court of the United States in United States v. Bryant (No. 15-420). The Brief makes numerous attacks on the Community’s criminal justice system, hasty generalizations regarding tribal justice systems, and omits relevant facts and conclusions regarding the Community.

The stated purpose of the Brief is “to draw upon amici’s knowledge and experience with tribal-court criminal litigation to give this Court an informed perspective from which to assess these claims.” Brief at 4 (emphasis added). Unfortunately, the Brief does not do so. Instead, it reads as a narrative and anecdotal attack on tribal justice systems, prominently including the Community. These attacks on the Community’s criminal justice system have often come in a third-party form, such as letters from the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and National Association of Federal Defenders to members of Congress regarding proposed legislation. Despite prominent mention of the Community, these letters- and the Brief-were not provided to the Community when sent or filed. We suspect it may have to do with the favorable outcomes to the Community in the cases discussed in the Brief.

Briefs and other materials in this case are here.

United South and Eastern Tribes Amicus Brief in Support of the Tribal Petitioners against NLRB

March 21, 2016March 21, 2016Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the USET brief in Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe v. NLRB:

USET Amicus in Support of Tribal Petitions

This one is substantially the same as USET’s brief in the Little River Band of Ottawa Indians Tribal Government v. NLRB case.

Ute Mountain Ute & State of Colorado File Joint Amicus Brief in Support of Tribal Cert Petitions in NLRB Cases

March 18, 2016March 18, 2016Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the brief:

Final CO-UMUT Amicus Cert Petition – Saginaw Chippewa and LRB

Complete Listing of Amicus Briefs Supporting Respondent in Dollar General v. Mississippi Choctaw

October 23, 2015October 23, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here:

amicus_merits_us

ACLU Amicus Brief

13-1496bsacPuyallupTribeOfIndians

13-1496 Amici Brief States

13-1496 bsac Historians and Legal Scholars

13-1496bsacNationalCongressOfAmericanIndiansEtAl

13-1496bsacNationalIndigenousWomensResourceCenter

13-1496 bsac Cherokee Nation et al

These briefs are also available at our regular page of background materials on the case, along with all the other briefs so far.

Ninth Circuit Sitting En Banc Rules in Favor of Big Lagoon Rancheria in Gaming Dispute with California

June 4, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the opinion in Big Lagoon Rancheria v. State of California:

10-17803

From the court’s syllabus:

The en banc court affirmed the district court’s summary judgment in favor of a tribe that alleged that the State of California had failed to negotiate in good faith for a gaming compact under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act for Class III gaming on a parcel of land taken into trust for the tribe by the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Rejecting California’s argument that the tribe lacked standing to compel it to negotiate in good faith under the IGRA, the en banc court held that the State’s argument amounted to an improper collateral attack on the BIA’s decisions to take the parcel of land into trust and to designate the tribe as a federally recognized Indian tribe. The en banc court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in failing to grant a continuance for additional discovery under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(f).

The en banc court dismissed the tribe’s cross-appeal as moot.

Links to oral argument and briefs here.

Big Lagoon En Banc Oral Argument Materials

September 19, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here is “Small Native American Tribe and U.S. Duke It Out at the 9th Circuit.”

This seems like a misleading headline since the tribe and Feds were on the same side. In short, argument seemed to go well for tribal interests.

You can access the argument here.

Materials here.

Ninth Circuit to Video Stream En banc Arguments in Big Lagoon Rancheria Gaming Matter (Sept. 17, 2014)

September 10, 2014September 10, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the news release. An excerpt:

On Wednesday, September 17, 2014, beginning at 10 a.m., the court will hear oral arguments in Big Lagoon Rancheria v. State of California, in which the state appeals the summary judgment by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in favor of Big Lagoon Rancheria, an Indian reservation near Eureka. The lower court determined that the state violated the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act by failing to negotiate in good faith for a tribal-state gaming compact.

Here is the panel: Alex Kozinski, Harry Pregerson, Stephen Reinhardt, Diarmuid O’Scannlain, Susan Graber, William Fletcher, Richard Paez, Jay S. Bybee, Milan Smith, Morgan Christen, and Jacqueline Nguyen

En banc materials here.

Panel materials here.

Ninth Circuit to Re-Hear Big Lagoon Rancheria Appeal Sept. 17, 2014

August 27, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here:

Big Lagoon — CA9 Order Setting Oral Argument

En banc materials here.

Panel materials here.