Here are the updated materials in Akiachak Native Community v. Jewell (D.D.C.):
139 Alaska Motion for Stay
140 Akiachak Opposition
143 Alaska Reply
145 DCT Order
For the foregoing reasons, the Court will GRANT IN PART Alaska’s motion for an injunction by enjoining the Secretary from taking any land into trust in Alaska, pending the outcome of the appeal. The Court’s ruling does not apply to the pre-existing exception for the Metlakatla Indian Community of the Annette Island Reserve or its members. 25 C.F.R. § 151.1; see also 79 Fed.Reg. 24,648, 24,649.
Materials on the merits here. Materials on the motion for reconsideration here.
Here are the materials in Akiachak Native Community v. Salazar (D. D.C.):
DCT Order Granting Summary J to Plaintiffs
Akiachak et al Motion for Summary J
DOI Motion for Summary J
DOI Supplemental Brief
Akiachak Supplemental Reply Brief
Four tribes of Alaska Natives and one individual Native brought this suit to challenge the Secretary of the Interior’s decision to leave in place a regulation that treats Alaska Natives differently from other native peoples. The challenged regulation governs the taking of land into trust under Section 5of the Indian Reorganization Act, 25 U.S.C. § 465; it provides that, with one exception, the regulatory procedures “do not cover the acquisition of land in trust status in the State of Alaska.” 25 C.F.R. § 151.1. The plaintiffs argue that this exclusion of Alaska Natives-and only Alaska Natives-from the land-into-trust application process is void under 25 U.S.C. § 476(g), which nullifies regulations that discriminate among Indian tribes. The State of Alaska has intervened to argue that the differential treatment is required by the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (“ANCSA” or the “Claims Settlement Act”), which (on the State’s account) deprived the Secretary of the statutory authority to take most Alaska land into trust.
The Secretary disagrees, but nonetheless seeks to justify the regulation by reference to ANCSA. For the reasons explained below, the court concludes  that the Secretary retains his statutory authority to take land into trust on behalf of all Alaska Natives, and that his decision to maintain the exclusion of most Natives from the land-into-trust regulation violates 25 U.S.C. § 476(g), which provides that contrary regulations “shall have no force or effect.” The court therefore grants summary judgment to the plaintiffs, and orders additional briefing on the question of the proper remedy.
Here is today’s opinion:
Briefs are here. Lower court materials are here.