Federal Magistrate Recommends Dismissal of Shinnecock Members’ Off-Reservation Fishing Rights Suit [again]

Here are the updated materials in Silva v. Farrish (E.D. N.Y.):

83-6 Suffolk County Motion for Summary Judgment

83-10 Opposition

83-12 Reply

84-8 New York Motion for Summary Judgment

84-13 Opposition

84-14 Reply

89 Magistrate Report

Prior post here.

Federal Magistrate Recommends Dismissal of Shinnecock Members’ Off-Reservation Fishing Rights Suit

Here are the materials in Silva v. Farrish (E.D. N.Y.):

54-3 county defendants motion to dismiss

54-4 reply

54-5 plaintiffs opposition

56-3 state defendants motion to dismiss

56-6 plaintiffs opposition

56-8 reply

63 magistrate report

Prior post here.

UPDATE:

64 objections

65 Suffolk County

Response

66 Silva Reply

Quileute & Quinault response to request for rehearing/rehearing en banc in ocean U&A case

Here is Quileute & Quinault’s response, addressing issues such as whether the Stevens treaties must be read together, the meaning of “fish” and whether U&As are species-specific, the proper use of the canons of construction, and what we know of the treaty negotiations at issue here.

Previous coverage here.

Ninth Circuit Audio and Video in United States v. Washington Culverts Appeal

Audio and video.

Billy Frank atop a culvert
Billy Frank atop a culvert

Opening and answer briefs.

Lower court materials here and here.

State of Washington’s Opening Brief in Ninth Circuit Appeal of Culverts Decision

Here:

State’s Opening Brief

Update: Oregon Amicus

Lower court materials are here.

Judge Martinez Issues Permanent Injunction Favoring Treaty Tribes in U.S. v. Washington Culverts Subproceeding

HUGE.

Here is the order (briefs shortly):

752 – Memorandum and Order Granting Perm. Injunction

Tribal Supplemental Brief

US Supplemental Brief

Washington Supplemental Brief

UPDATE: Perm Injunction

Judge Martinez’s 2007 order (and materials) is here.

Lax Kw’alaams Indian Band v. Canada – Something Smells Fishy About This Decision…

In Lax Kw’alaams Indian Band v. Canada (Attorney General), 2011 SCC 56, the Supreme Court of Canada recently (Nov. 10) dealt a serious blow to any tribes wanting to engage in commercial fisheries within their traditional territories.   The unanimous, 7 judge court (McLachlin, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Abella, Charron, and Rothstein) rejected a claim to possession (under s. 35) of an aboriginal right to fish commercially all species in their traditional territories.  Before contact with the newcomers, the Lax Kw’alaams Indian Band fished off their ancestral coast for thousands of years, regularly traded fish grease extracted from the eulachon, as well engaged in occassional trade in other fish and fish products.  As such, the Lax Kw’alaams sought a declaration as to their aboriginal rights to engage in commercial fishing.  The trial judge and later, the British Columbia Court of Appeal, rejected their claim.  The Supreme Court followed suit – and Justice Binnie (shouldn’t he be gone by now?), writing for the court, agreed with the lower courts.

Continue reading