fee to trust

New Student Scholarship on Trust Land Acquisitions for Alaska Tribal Nations

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Alexis Studler has published “Reviving Indian Country: Expanding Alaska Native Villages’ Tribal Land Bases Through Fee-to-Trust Acquisitions” in the Michigan Journal of Race & Law.

Here is the abstract:

For the last fifty years, the possibility of fee-to-trust acquisitions in Alaska has been precarious at best. This is largely due to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 (ANCSA), which eschewed the traditional reservation system in favor of corporate land ownership and management. Despite its silence on trust acquisitions, ANCSA was and still is cited as the primary prohibition to trust acquisitions in Alaska. Essentially, ANCSA both reduced Indian Country in Alaska and prohibited any opportunities to create it, leaving Alaska Native Villages without the significant territorial jurisdiction afforded to Lower 48 tribes. However, recent policy changes from the Department of Interior reaffirmed the eligibility of trust acquisitions post-ANCSA and a proposed rule from the Bureau of Indian Affairs signals a favorable presumption of approval for Alaska Native fee-to-trust applications. This Note reviews the history and controversy of trust acquisitions in Alaska, and more importantly, it demonstrates the methods in which Alaska Native Villages may still acquire fee land for trust acquisitions after ANCSA.

Federal Circuit Rejects Takings Claim Arising from Cherokee Trust Land Acquisition

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Berry v. United States:

Unpublished Opinion

Opening Brief

Answer Brief

Lower Court Decision

Wisconsin Federal Court Dismisses Property Owners’ Challenge to Interior Trust Land Acquisition for Menominee

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Legend Lake Property Owners Assn. v. Dept. of the Interior (E.D. Wis.):

1 Complaint.pdfDownload
15 Motion to Dismiss.pdfDownload
18 Brief in Opposition.pdfDownload
20 Reply.pdfDownload
21 Menominee Motion to File Amicus Brief.pdfDownload
21-1 Menominee Proposed Amicus Brief.pdfDownload
25 DCT Order.pdfDownload

Minnesota Municipalities Challenge Interior Trust Land Acquisition for Mille Lacs Band Ojibwe

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the complaint in Morrison County v. Dept. of the Interior (D. Minn.):

1 Complaint.pdfDownload
1-1 IBIA Decision.pdfDownload

New Student Scholarship on Trust Land Acquisitions for Alaska Tribal Nations

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Alexis Studler has posted “Reviving Indian Country: Expanding Alaska Native Villages’ Tribal Land Bases Through Fee-to-Trust Acquisitions,” forthcoming in the Michigan Journal of Race & Law, on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

For the last fifty years, the possibility of fee-to-trust acquisitions in Alaska has been precarious at best. This is largely due to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 (ANCSA), which eschewed the traditional reservation system in favor of corporate land ownership and management. Despite its silence on trust acquisitions, ANCSA was and still is cited as the primary prohibition to trust acquisitions in Alaska. Essentially, ANCSA both reduced Indian Country in Alaska and prohibited any opportunities to create it, leaving Alaska Native Villages without the significant territorial jurisdiction afforded to Lower 48 tribes. However, recent policy changes from the Department of Interior reaffirmed the eligibility of trust acquisitions post-ANCSA and a proposed rule from the Bureau of Indian Affairs signals a favorable presumption of approval for Alaska Native fee-to-trust applications. This Note reviews the history and controversy of trust acquisitions in Alaska, and more importantly, it demonstrates the methods in which Alaska Native Villages may still acquire fee land for trust acquisitions after ANCSA.

Sault Tribe Trust Land Acquisition Appeal [updated 1/12/24]

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the briefs (only one so far) in Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians v. Haaland (D.C. Cir.):

Sault Tribe Opening Brief.pdfDownload
Federal Answer Brief.pdfDownload
Saginaw Chippewa and Nottawaseppi Brief.pdfDownload
Detroit Casinos Brief.pdfDownload

Sault Tribe Reply

Lower court materials here.

Tenth Circuit Affirms Interior Decision on Wyandotte Lands in Kansas

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opinion in State of Kansas ex rel. Kobach v. Dep’t of the Interior.

Briefs here.

D.C. Federal Court Rejects Sault Tribe’s Third Effort to Force Interior to Acquire Land for Off-Rez Gaming

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the order in Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians v. Haaland (D.D.C.):

106-dct-orderDownload

Briefs here.

Arizona Federal Court Allows Navajo Suit against Interior over Hopi Trust Land Acquisition

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Navajo Nation v. Dept. of the Interior (D. Ariz.):

31 First Amended Complaint

35 Motion to Dismiss

38 Opposition

41 Reply

42-dct-orderDownload

This case is on remand after the parties agreed to the vacature of the district court’s dismissal of the suit.

Interior Proposes New Fee-to-Trust Regs and New Class III Compact Process Regs, Parts 151 and 293

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here.

From the notice:

The Department of the Interior (Department) invites Tribal Leaders to consult on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for the Department’s Land Acquisition regulations, 25 CFR Part 151, and the NPRM for the Department’s Class III Tribal State Gaming Compact Process, 25 CFR Part 293.

25 CFR Part 151, Land Acquisition

Since the Department first promulgated these regulations in 1980, it has developed extensive experience in the fee-to-trust acquisition process.  Relying on that experience and input from Tribes, this proposed rule seeks to make the fee-to-trust process more efficient, simpler, and less expensive to support restoration of Tribal homelands.

25 CFR Part 293, Class III Tribal State Gaming Compact Process

The Department is developing proposed updates to Part 293 to provide clear guidance regarding the Secretary’s review and evaluation process for Tribal-State class III gaming compacts.  The current regulations do not identify the factors the Department considers; rather, those factors are contained in a series of decision letters issued by the Department since the enactment of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act in 1988.  Recent and ongoing litigation highlights the need for the Department to clarify how it will review or analyze gaming compacts to determine whether they comply with federal law. 

Tribal Consultation

The Department will conduct two virtual consultation sessions and one in-person consultation to obtain further Tribal input on the Part 151 NPRM and the Part 293 NPRM.  The consultation sessions will be open to Tribal leadership and representatives of federally recognized Indian Tribes and Alaska Native Corporations.  Please join us at one or more of the following consultations sessions.

If you would like to provide written comments, please email them to consultation@bia.gov by 11:59 p.m. EST on Wednesday, March 1, 2023.