The petitions in Haggerty, Stand Up, GRE Six Nations, and Tanner were all denied (see prior post).
The court also denied three McGirt-related petitions from Oklahoma prisoners:
Parish Petition/Amicus/BIO/Reply
Several Indian law cert petitions are set for discussion today at the Supreme Court’s conference (which is their fancy way of saying they’re meeting as a group of 9 to discuss pending cases; where they decide whether or not to accept a cert petition). Here’s a list:
Grand River Six Nations Enterprises Ltd. v. Boughton
Several of the McGirt-related petitions
The fun keeps going next week:
Klickitat County v. Yakama Nation Cert Petition
And the week after that:
All the briefs are here. The Court will first consider the case at this Friday’s conference (1/7).
Here is the petition in Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe v. Lummi Nation:
Question presented:
The question presented is whether the Ninth Circuit—in conflict with decisions of this Court and other courts—properly abrogated the long-settled and original understanding of a central treaty term, without any legal or factual basis for doing so, and while redefining the boundary of a major body of water to accommodate its novel treaty interpretation.
Lower court materials here.
Here is the petition in Klickitat County v. Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation:
Questions presented:
1. Whether, or in what circumstances, a court may override an Act of Congress adopting a boundary for an Indian reservation, and set its own boundary.
2. Whether the Ninth Circuit erred by holding-in conflict with the decisions of this Court, including a decision involving the very boundary at issue-that the Reservation encompasses the area at issue.
Lower court materials here.
Here is the petition in Penobscot Nation v. Frey:
Here is the petition in United States v. Frey:
Question presented (from the Penobscot petition):
Whether the Maine Indian Settlement Acts— consistent with this Court’s precedents on statutory interpretation and the Indian canons of construction— codify the historical understanding of the Penobscot Nation, the United States, and the State that the Penobscot Reservation encompasses the Main Stem of the Penobscot River.
Lower court materials here.
Update:
Here:
Question presented:
Whether the 1855 Treaty of Detroit established a federal reservation for the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians?
Lower court materials here.
Here:
Questions presented:
1. In view of Sherrill, whether New York tribes exercise “concurrent” jurisdiction over fee lands within the plenary taxing and regulatory authority of the state and local governments, thereby enabling those tribes to engage in gaming under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA), and cause the same or greater disruptions of settled expectations condemned by this Court in Sherrill.
2. Whether fee lands under plenary state and local taxation and regulation (per Sherrill) constitute “Indian lands” under IGRA because those lands are located within the Cayugas’ historic reservation.
3. Whether the Cayuga Nation’s ancient reservation was disestablished.
Lower court materials here.
Here is the petition in Stand Up for California! v. Dept. of the Interior:
Question presented:
Whether the Secretary can acquire land in trust on behalf of Indians whose federal supervision was terminated by Congress.
Lower court materials here.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.