Seattle Times did an incredible profile of the case and its legacy back in January.
Boldt decision
Charles Wilkinson on the History of the Boldt Decision
Charles F. Wilkinson and the University of Washington Press have published “Treaty Justice: The Northwest Tribes, the Boldt Decision, and the Recognition of Fishing Rights.”
Blurb:
In 1974, Judge George Boldt issued a ruling that affirmed the fishing rights and tribal sovereignty of Native nations in Washington State. The Boldt Decision transformed Indigenous law and resource management across the United States and beyond. Like Brown v. Board of Education, the case also brought about far-reaching societal changes, reinforcing tribal sovereignty and remedying decades of injustice.
Eminent legal historian and tribal advocate Charles Wilkinson tells the dramatic story of the Boldt Decision against the backdrop of salmon’s central place in the cultures and economies of the Pacific Northwest. In the 1960s, Native people reasserted their fishing rights as delineated in nineteenth-century treaties. In response, state officials worked with non-Indian commercial and sport fishing interests to forcefully—and often violently—oppose Native actions. These “fish wars” spurred twenty tribes and the US government to file suit in federal court. Moved by the testimony of tribal leaders and other experts, Boldt pointedly waited until Lincoln’s birthday to hand down a decision recognizing the tribes’ right to half of the state’s fish. The case’s long aftermath led from the Supreme Court’s affirmation of Boldt’s opinion to collaborative management of the harvest of salmon and other marine resources.
Expert and compelling, Treaty Justice weaves personalities and local detail into the definitive account of one of the twentieth century’s most important civil rights cases.
Federal Court Issues Decision in U.S. v. Washington Subproceeding 19-01
Here are the updated materials in United States v. Washington (W.D. Wash.), subproceeding 19-01:
Earlier briefs here.
Ninth Circuit Briefs in Lummi Tribe U& A
Here are the materials in United States v. Washington, subproceeding 11-02 (W.D. Wash.):
Port Gamble and Jamestown S’Kllalam Tribes Brief
Lower court materials here.
Federal Court Concludes U.S. v. Washington 11-02 Subproceeding [Lummi + S’Klallam Tribes]
Here are the new materials in United States v. Washington (W.D. Wash.) [subproceeding 11-02]:
238 Jamestown and Port Gamble S’Klallam Tribes Motion
247 Jamestown and Port Gamble Reply
255 Jamestown and Port Gamble Response
262 Jamestown and Port Gamble Surreply
Ninth Circuit materials here and here.
Previous lower court court materials here.
S’Klallam Tribes Prevail over Lummi in U.S. v. Washington U&A Subproceeding
Here are the materials in United States v. Washington subproceeding 11-2 (W.D. Wash.):
164 Jamestown and Port Gamble Motion
176 Jamestown and Port Gamble Response
186 Jamestown and Port Gamble Reply
This matter is on remand from the Ninth Circuit, materials here.
Ninth Circuit Rules in Favor of Lummi Tribe in Treaty Fishing Dispute
Here is the court’s opinion in United States (Lower Elwha Klallam Indian Tribe) v. Lummi Tribe:
The court’s syllabus:
The panel reversed the district court’s summary judgment entered in favor of the Klallam Tribe in a case involving a fishing territory dispute between two sets of Indian Tribes, brought pursuant to the continuing jurisdiction of the 1974 “Boldt Decree” issued by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington.
The panel held that the issue of whether the waters immediately to the west of northern Whidbey Island were part of the Lummi Tribe’s usual and accustomed fishing grounds had not yet been determined. The panel held, therefore, that the district court erred in concluding that the issue was controlled by law of the case. The panel remanded to the district court for further proceedings.
Judge Rawlinson dissented because she would hold that the district court properly applied the law of the case doctrine where the fishing rights issue was addressed in the prior opinion United States v. Lummi Indian Tribe, 235 F.3d 443 (9th Cir. 2000).
Briefs and other materials here.
Ninth Circuit Materials in U.S. v. Washington Subproceeding — Klallam Tribes v. Lummi Tribe
News Coverage of Boldt Decision’s 40th Anny
Here.
Phil Katzen to Speak at Seattle Law School about Boldt Decision — Feb. 18, 2014
Here (PDF):
You must be logged in to post a comment.