cert petition

Lummi Tribe v. United States Cert Petition [HUD Funding]

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the petition:

Cert Petition

Questions presented:

Does 28 U.S.C. § 1491 grant the court of federal claims jurisdiction over an action to recover grant-in-aid funds unlawfully recouped by the United States or is the action one for specific relief which must be brought under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 702?
Does the court of federal claims have jurisdiction to enter a judgment on an illegal exaction claim when the United States had previously awarded money to a recipient under a grant-in-aid statute and then unlawfully recouped the funds?
Where a grant-in-aid statute mandates that the United States pay grant funds to a plaintiff, does the court of federal claims have jurisdiction to enter a money judgment for the failure to pay the grant funds even if there are conditions on the use of the grant funds after they are awarded?

Lower court materials here.

UPDATE:

us cert opp

Reply

Cert Petition Filed over Ione Band of Miwok Indians Trust Land Acquisition

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the petition in County of Amador v. Dept. of the Interior:

Cert Petition

UPDATE: Cert Opp

Questions presented:

1. Whether Congress intended the phrase “under Federal jurisdiction,” as used in the 1934 Act, to encompass a tribe that, as of June 18, 1934, had no land held on its behalf by the federal government, either in trust or as allotments; was not a party to any treaty with the United States; did not receive services or benefits from the federal government; did not have members enrolled with the Indian Office; and which was not invited to organize under the IRA in 1934 by the Secretary like other recognized tribes in Amador County; but for whom the federal government had unsuccessfully attempted to purchase land pursuant to a generic appropriation authorizing the purchase of land for unspecified “landless Indians” in California?
2. Whether the Secretary’s authority to take land into trust for “members of any recognized Indian tribe now under Federal jurisdiction” requires that the tribe have been “recognized” in 1934, in addition to being “under Federaljurisdiction” at that time, or whether such “recognition” can come decades after the statute’s enactment?
3. Whether the Secretary, having explicitly concluded that in enacting the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act Congress intended that Indian tribes “restored to Federal recognition” refers only to tribes that are “restored” pursuant to (a) congressional legislation, (b) a judgment or settlement agreement in a federal court case to which the United States is a party, or (c) “through the administrative Federal Acknowledgment Process under [25 C.F.R. § 83.8],” and having embodied that conclusion in a formal regulation, 25 C.F.R. § 292.10, can then act contrary to Congress’s intention by “grandfathering in” a preliminary (i.e., non-final) agency action treating Indians who do not meet the regulatory definition as “restored”?
Lower court materials here.

Royal v. Murphy Brief in Opposition

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Murphy BIO FINAL

Cert petition is here.

Fort Peck Housing Authority v. HUD Cert Petition

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Fort Peck Cert Petition

UPDATE:

Cert Opp

Reply

Question presented:

Whether an action for the restoration of grant in aid funds illegally recouped by the United States constitutes a suit for specific relief such that the United States’ sovereign immunity is waived pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 702, or whether it is a suit for money damages, barring relief in the federal district courts.

Lower court materials.

Cert Opposition Brief in N.M. Public Service Co. v. Barboan & Navajo

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

cert opposition[Navajo]

US Cert Opp

Cert petition here.

Poarch Band of Creek Indians v. Wilkes Cert Stage Materials

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Poarch Band et al v Wilkes petition for writ

17-1175 Indian Law Scholars amicus brief

UnitedSouthandEasternTribes inc.

wilkes brief in opposition

Reply

sg-invitation-brief-1.pdf

17-1175SupplementalBriefForRespondents

Petitioners Supplemental Brief

Lower court materials here.

Tavares v. Whitehouse Cert Petition Denied

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is today’s order list.

Cert stage materials here.

In re B.B./R.K.B. v. E.T. Cert Denied

Kate Fort

This morning the Supreme Court denied cert in the Utah Supreme Court case establishing a federal standard of reasonableness for a putative father to acknowledge or establish paternity.

Case page here.

Order list here.

Sharp Image v. Shingle Springs Cert Petition

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the petition captioned Sharp Image Gaming, Inc. v. Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians:

petitionforawritofcertiorari

Question presented:

Whether a collateral agreement to a management contract for an Indian gaming operation is subject to approval by the National Indian Gaming Commission only if the collateral agreement itself provides for management of all or part of the operation.

Lower court materials here.

Harvey v. Ute Indian Tribe Cert Petition

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Harvey v. Ute et al. Petition

Questions presented:

1.Whether the tribal remedies exhaustion doctrine, which requires federal courts to stay cases challenging tribal jurisdiction until the parties have exhausted parallel tribal court proceedings, applies to state courts as well.

2.Whether the tribal remedies exhaustion doctrine requires that nontribal courts yield to tribal courts when the parties have not invoked the tribal court‘s jurisdiction.

Lower court materials here.

UPDATES:

cert opp brief

Reply

SG Brief [Ute]

Petitioners Supplemental Brief