Here is the opinion in Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon v. Jewell:
Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde Community v. Jewell DC Cir 7-19-16
Briefs here.
Here is the opinion in Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon v. Jewell:
Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde Community v. Jewell DC Cir 7-19-16
Briefs here.
Here are the materials in Littlefield v. Dept. of Interior (D. Mass.):
56 Interior Motion for Summary J
59 Plaintiffs Motion for Summary J
69 City of Taunton Amicus Brief
Here are the materials, so far, in Littlefield et. al. v. U.S. Department of Interior (D. Mass.):
Doc. 1 – Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief
Doc. 10 – United States’ Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Partial Dismissal
Except:
Plaintiffs’ Fifth Cause of Action seeks a declaration that the IRA, enacted over eighty years ago, is unconstitutional. Plaintiffs specifically allege that the IRA’s provision authorizing the Secretary to acquire land in trust on behalf of federally-recognized Indian tribes somehow reflects an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority. This legal question, however, has long been resolved against Plaintiffs by all courts to consider it, including the First Circuit in a decision binding on this Court. Federal courts have held, consistently and repeatedly, that the Secretary’s authority to acquire land in trust under the IRA does not violate the United States Constitution because there are sufficient intelligible principles provided in the statute and its legislative history to guide the Secretary’s discretion whether to acquire land in trust on behalf of a tribe. Moreover, it has been over 85 years since the Supreme Court invalidated any statute on the grounds of excessive delegation of legislative authority. The Supreme Court in fact has only found two statues to be a violation of the non-delegation doctrine, neither of which are comparable to the statute at issue here. Accordingly, the Court must dismiss Plaintiffs’ Fifth Cause of Action.
Here are the briefs in County of Amador v. Dept. of Interior:
Other briefs TK
Here are the briefs in No Casino in Plymouth v. Jewell:
Lower court materials for both cases here.
Here:
Lower court materials here.
Here are the materials in No Casino in Plymouth v. Jewell (E.D. Cal.):
72-1 No Casino in Plymouth Motion for Summary J
91-1 Ione Band Motion for Summary J
93 No Casino in Plymouth Opposition
93-2 No Casino in Plymouth Reply
Here are the materials in County of Amador v. Dept. of Interior (E.D. Cal.):
65 County Motion for Summary J
Here are the materials in Citizens for a Better Way v. Dept. of Interior (E.D. Cal.):
158 DCT Order on Motions to Strike
Briefs are here.
Here are the materials in the matter captioned by the court Citizens for a Better Way v. Dept. of Interior (E.D. Cal.):
98-1 UAIC Motion for Summary J
99-1 Citizens for a Better Way Motion for Summary J
102-1 Colusa Motion for Summary J
119-1 Enterprise Rancheria Motion for Summary J
120-1 Enterprise Rancheria Motion to Strike Guerrero Dec
121-1 Enterprise Rancheria Motion to Strike Meister Dec
126 UAIC Opposition to Summary J Motion
127 UAIC Opposition to Motion to Strike
128 Citizens for a Better Way Opposition to Summary J Motion
130 Colusa Opposition to Summary J Motion
131 Colusa Opposition to Motion to Strike
135 US Reply re Motion to Strike
136 Enterprise Rancheria Reply re Summary J Motion
137 Enterprise Rancheria Reply re Motion to Strike Guerrero
138 Enterprise Rancheria Reply re Motion to Strike Meister
158 DCT Order Granting Motions to Strike
Materials in the TRO stage of this litigation are here.
You must be logged in to post a comment.