Federal Lawyer Annual Indian Law Edition 2019

Here:

Tribes and Cannabis: Reaching New Highs in the Burgeoning Cannabis Marketplace
U.S. Sales of Legal cannabis reached $9.2 billion in 2017 – a 33 percent increase over 2016 – and are on track to reach $24.5 billion by 2021. 

Features

Pipleline to Tribal Soveignty: Celebrating the Pre-Law Summer Institute’s 50th Class
If you ask Native American attorneys how they prepared for law school, chances are they’ll tell you they attended the American Indian Law Center Inc.’s Pre-Law Summer Institute (PLSI).
The Violence Against Women Act of 2018: A Step in the Right Direction for Indian Children and Federal Indian Law
It is well-settled law that if a person who violates the laws of the United States is a resident of another country, that person falls within the criminal jurisdiction of the United States. Similarly, if a person crosses state lines and commits child abuse in another state, he or she falls under the jurisdiction of the state where the crime was committed.
Rethinking Administrative Advocacy: A Step-by-Step Approach from Former Government Insiders
In today’s political climate, with frequent changes in leadership positions and new policy agendas, there has never been a better time to develop or brush up your administration advocacy skills to better achieve success for your client.

UPDATE — Suquamish is the first tribe with a compact with a state… here.

Federal Lawyer Indian Law Issue 2017

Here:

The Rapidly Increasing Extraction of Oil, and Native Women, in North Dakota
During the past year, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and allies made national news as they gathered in prayerful ceremony at the confluence of the Missouri and Cannonball Rivers to stop the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline project in North Dakota. The pipeline threatens the tribe’s drinking water, sacred sites, and burial grounds, and, as a result, much attention has been paid to the potential environmental and cultural impacts of the pipeline. Little to no focus, however, has been given to the proposed pipeline’s impacts on the safety of Native women and children living in the Bakken region of North Dakota.
Statutory Divestiture of Tribal Sovereignty
The Supreme Court’s non-decision in Dollar General v. Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians is evidence not only of disagreement on tribal civil jurisdiction but perhaps also uncertainty in how to analyze divestiture of tribal sovereignty. Most scholars (including myself) have described the Court’s behavior in tribal sovereign authority cases as one of judicial supremacy, in that the Court merely makes policy choices based on its own ideological views of tribal power.
Breaking Faith With the Tribal Sovereignty Doctrine
The great Seneca Nation leader and diplomat Red Jacket is said to have illustrated the tribe’s frustration with the insatiable encroachment of those seeking Seneca lands during a negotiation with the Holland Land Company’s agent, Joseph Ellicott. The two were seated on a log.
Tribes and Cannabis: Seeking Parity with States and Consultation and Agreement from the U.S. Government
Sales of legal cannabis reached nearly $7 billion in 2016 and are expected to eclipse $20 billion by 2021. Despite their efforts, and an overarching trust obligation owed by the U.S. government to Indian nations, American Indian tribes adopting state “go-it-alone” models of cannabis legalization have failed to receive parity in treatment with states on cannabis issues and have been met with threats or actions by law enforcement.

Fletcher on Statutory Divestiture of Tribal Sovereignty

“Statutory Divestiture of Tribal Sovereignty” is now available on SSRN, here. Forthcoming in the Federal Lawyer, April 2017.

The abstract:

The Supreme Court’s non-decision in Dollar General v. Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians is evidence not only of disagreement on tribal civil jurisdiction but perhaps also uncertainty in how to analyze divestiture of tribal sovereignty. Most scholars (including myself) have described the Court’s behavior in tribal sovereign authority cases as one of judicial supremacy, in that the Court merely makes policy choices based on its own ideological views of tribal power. That is a mistake. Persuaded by the federal government’s argument in Dollar General, I now argue that the proper analysis rests with federal statutes. Indian law practitioners can and should reconsider the Court’s prior decisions in this vein, as the best ones already do, and analyze tribal sovereign powers in the paradigm of statutory divestiture rather than judicial supremacy.

Professor Tsosie on Indigenous Identity & Sports Mascots

Professor Tsosie’s excellent Federal Lawyer article on identity and sports mascots is available below. Her longer law review article on these subjects is available here.

Tsosie Fed Lawyer Art on Mascots

As one of the curators of the Indian law columns for the Federal Lawyer, I am proud to have solicited this piece and grateful that she could squeeze writing it into her schedule.

Jessica Intermill on Federal Statutes of General Applicability

Jessica Intermill has published “Competing Sovereigns: Circuit Courts’ Varied Approaches to Federal Statutes in Indian Country” in the September 2015 issue of the Federal Lawyer. The article details the Sixth Circuit’s varied approaches in Little River Band of Ottawa Indians Tribal Government v. NLRB and NLRB v. Soaring Eagle Casino and Resort (en banc petition materials here).