cert petition

Albrecht v. County of Riverside Cert Petition [Leasing Regs + Taxation Preemption]

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

albrecht-cert-petitionDownload

Lower court materials here.

Questions presented:

  1. Do the federal regulations governing the leasing of Indian lands preempt state and local governments
    from taxing the leasehold interest conveyed by the regulated leases?
  2. Does the express preemption provision of the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934—which prohibits
    state taxes on “any interest in lands” that the government “acquire[s] pursuant to this Act … in trust
    for [an] Indian tribe or individual Indian”—apply when the government acquires extended trust rights
    pursuant to the Act?

SCOTUS Denies Cert in Three [I Mean Four] Indian Law Cases; Still Waiting on Brackeen

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is today’s order list.

The petitions denied were Big Sandy’s tax case, Jamestown S’Klallam’s U&A-related petition, and Self v. Trinidad Rancheria, another immovable property exception case. [UPDATE: Oops, forgot Dakota Access.]

In case anything happens, we’ll be outside waiting.

Cert Petitions Filed on Habematolel Pomo of Upper Lake Internet Lending

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the petition in Treppa v. Hengle:

treppa-petitionDownload

Appendix

Treppa Application for Stay

Hengle Opposition

Reply

Questions presented:

  1. Whether a court can invalidate an agreement to have an arbitrator resolve questions of arbitrability (a “delegation clause”) based on the court’s interpretation of a separate choice-of-law provision.
  2. Whether sovereign immunity bars private plaintiffs from suing tribal government officials, in their official
    capacities, for alleged violations of state law

Lower court materials here.

In the tule swamp–upper lake Pomo [LOC]

Here is the petition in a related case, Asner v. Hengle:

asner-petition-and-appendixDownload

Question presented:

Can a federal court refuse to enforce the delegation clause of an arbitration agreement on the ground that a choice-of-law provision applicable to the arbitration agreement as a whole prospectively waives federal rights?

Samish Indian Nation v. Washington Cert Petition

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

samish-cert-petitionDownload

Appendix

Questions presented:

  1. Whether Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity and tribal sovereign immunity deprived the lower courts of subject-matter jurisdiction over the Snoqualmie Indian Tribe’s claim, requiring dismissal on that ground under United States Supreme Court precedent including Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. 83 (1996).
  2. Whether, under United States Supreme Court precedent including Ruhrgas AG v. Marathon Oil Co., 526 U.S. 574 (1999) and Sinochem Int’l Co. v. Malaysia Intern. Shipping Corp., 549 U.S. 422 (2007), an issue preclusion dismissal is a merits dismissal and excluded from the threshold grounds among which a federal court may choose to dismiss a case before establishing its subject-matter jurisdiction.
  3. Whether, under United States Supreme Court precedent including Sinochem Int’l Co. v. Malaysia Intern. Shipping Corp., 549 U.S. 422 (2007), jurisdictional issues in this case were not “arduous” or “difficult to determine” because the lower courts could readily determine that they lacked jurisdiction, such that those courts committed reversible error in bypassing determination of their subject-matter jurisdiction and proceeding to dismiss the case instead with prejudice on issue preclusion grounds.
“Siwash” Indians Harvesting Hops at Snoqualmie

Lower court materials here.

SCOTUS Holds Brackeen and Oklahoma’s McGirt Petitions, Other Petitions Denied

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Today’s order list.

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

Davis Petition

Compelleebee Petition

We’ll just keep waiting.

Big Day for Indian Law at the January 7 SCOTUS Conference [a mini-long conference???]

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

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:

The Brackeen/ICWA petitions

Grand River Six Nations Enterprises Ltd. v. Boughton

Haggerty v. United States

Several of the McGirt-related petitions

Yet another Stand Up petition

Tanner v. Cayuga

The fun keeps going next week:

Klickitat County v. Yakama Nation Cert Petition

And the week after that:

Dakota Access v. Standing Rock

Haaland v. Brackeen [ICWA] Cert Stage Briefing Completed

Kate Fort

All the briefs are here. The Court will first consider the case at this Friday’s conference (1/7).

Tribal Amicus Brief Supporting Cert Petition in LTBB v. Whitmer

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

21-769 Little Traverse v Whitmer – Tribal cert amicus.pdfDownload

Petition here.

Sklallam Tribes’ Cert Petition over Lummi Nation U&A [U.S. v. Washington subproceeding 11-02]

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the petition in Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe v. Lummi Nation:

Cert Petition.pdfDownload

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.

Klickitat County v. Yakama Nation Cert Petition

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the petition in Klickitat County v. Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation:

Cert Petition.pdfDownload

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.

Klickitat Supplemental Brief

Yakama BIO

Reply