Tribes and Detroit Casinos Allowed to Intervene in Sault Tribe Suit over Lansing and Wayne County Off-Rez Gaming Applications

Here are the materials so far in Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians v. Bernhardt (D.D.C.):

1 Complaint

1-1 Solicitor Opinion on Bay Mills

1-2 Wayne County Application

1-3 Lansing Application

1-4 Supplemental Materials

1-5 Jan 2017 Interior Letter

1-6 July 2017 Interior Decision

11 Answer

16-1 Saginaw Chippewa Motion to Intervene

18-1 Detroit Casinos Motion to Intervene

20 Nottawaseppi Huron Band Motion to Intervene

28 Sault Tribe Opposition to Intervention Motions

29 Federal Opposition to Detroit Casinos Motion to Intervene

31 Saginaw Chippewa Reply in Support of 16

32 Detroit Casinos Reply in Support of Motion to Intervene

33 NHBPI Reply in Support of Motion to Intervene

35 DCT Order

Prior posts on the Lansing/Wayne County casino proposals are here.

Bethany C. Sullivan & Jennifer L. Turner on Carcieri

Bethany C. Sullivan and Jennifer L. Turner have published “Enough Is Enough: Ten Years of Carcieri v. Salazar” in the Public Land & Resources Law Review. Here is the abstract:

Ten years ago, the United States Supreme Court issued its watershed decision in Carcieri v. Salazar, landing a gut punch to Indian country. Through that decision, the Supreme Court upended decades of Department of the Interior regulations, policy, and practice related to the eligibility of all federally recognized tribes for the restoration of tribal homelands through the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA) of 1934. The Court held that tribes must demonstrate that they were “under federal jurisdiction” in 1934 to qualify for land into trust under the first definition of “Indian” in the IRA. Carcieri has impacted all tribes by upending the land-into-trust process and requiring tribes (and Interior) to spend scant resources to establish statutory authority for trust land acquisitions, a burdensome task that had previously been straight forward. In addition, Carcieri has complicated, if not prevented altogether, trust acquisition for tribes who face difficulty in making the requisite jurisdictional showing. 

This Article provides the first comprehensive analysis of the last ten years of Indian law and policy that have unfurled from the Supreme Court’s decision. It describes how Carcieri has been weaponized by states, local governments, citizens’ groups, individuals, corporations, and even other tribes, to challenge the exercise of tribal sovereignty through the acquisition of tribal lands, and, at times, the very existence of Indian tribes. This Article details the litigation that has since ballooned, illustrating the dangerous scope creep of Carcieri, while categorizing and evaluating the underlying claims. It also looks to the future, and concludes that, while unlikely, a universal, clean congressional fix is the only real solution. The last ten years of litigation, hearings, and never-ending debate demonstrate that Carcieri is not a constructive or appropriate framework for resolving larger policy questions about the land-into-trust process. Finally, the Article ends by providing practice tips for tribes navigating the current Carcieri landscape.

Interior Decision on Samish Fee to Trust Acquisition

Here:

2018-11-09-final-ftt-decision-reg-dir1.pdf

2018-11-09-attachment-1-to-ftt-dec-samish-carcieri-analysis.pdf

Sault Tribe Sues Interior over Failure to Comply with Mandatory Trust Land Acquisition Statute

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

1 Complaint

1-1 Exhibit I

1-2 Exhibit II

1-3 Exhibit III

1-4 Exhibit IV

1-5 Exhibit V

1-6 Exhibit VI

Interior denial letter here.

Lansing trust land acquisition application docs.

Wayne County trust land acquisition application docs.

State of Michigan v. Payment materials here.

 

Materials in Dispute over Trust Status of Parcel 5 at Upper Lake Rancheria

Here are the materials in the zombie case, Upper Lake Pomo Association v. Morton (E.D. Cal.) [yes, that’s Rogers Morton and yes, the caption number starts with 75]:

320 Jackson Motion to Enforce

324-1 Diwald Motion to Intervene

325 US Opposition to 320

328 Opposition to 324

332 Jackson Reply in Support of 320

333 Diwald Reply in Support of 324

335 DCT Order

Federal Court Rejects Constitutional Challenge to IRA Section 5 [fee to trust statute]

Here are the materials in Club One Casino v. Dept. of Interior (E.D. Cal.):

36-1 club one casino motion for summary j

37-1 doi motion for summary j

38 club one reply

39 doi reply

40 dct order

Prior post here.

NYTs: “Land-Trust Case Raises Red Flags Across Indian Country”

Here.

Ninth Circuit Affirms Interior Decision Favoring Estom Yumeka Maidu Tribe of the Enterprise Rancheria

Here is the opinion in Cachil Dehe Band of Wintun Indians of the Colusa Indian Community v. Zinke.

Briefs here.

D.C. Circuit Rules in Favor of Feds/Tribe in Butte County v. Chaudhuri

Here is the opinion:

Opinion

Briefs here.

Ninth Circuit Denies En Banc Review of Ione Casino Challenges

Here are the materials in No Casino in Plymouth v. Zinke:

Ione adv No Casino – 9th Circuit – Order Denying No Casino Petition for Panel Rehearing or Rehearing En Banc filed 01-11-2018

Ione Band Response [No Casino]

No Casino En Banc Petition

US Response [No Casino]

Here are the materials in County of Amador v. Dept. of Interior:

Ione adv Amador County – 9th Circuit – Order Denying County Petition for Rehearing En Banc filed 01-11-2018

Amador County En Banc Petition

Ione Band Response [Amador]

US Response [Amador]

Panel materials in both cases here.