liquor – Turtle Talk

In Solem v. Bartlett, the Court articulated a three-part analysis designed to evaluate whether a surplus land act may have resulted in a diminishment of a federal Indian reservation. See 465 U.S. 463, 470-72 (1984). The Court found that the “statutory language used to open the Indian lands,” “events surrounding the passage of a surplus land Act,” and “events that occurred after the passage of a surplus land Act” are all relevant to determining whether diminishment has occurred.

The questions presented by the petition are:

1. Whether ambiguous evidence concerning the first two Solem factors necessarily forecloses any possibility that diminishment could be found on a de facto basis.

2. Whether the original boundaries of the Omaha Indian Reservation were diminished following passage of the Act of August 7, 1882.

Lower court materials here.

Eighth Circuit Rules Omaha Indian Reservation Not Diminished

December 19, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher3 Comments

Here is the opinion. An excerpt:

Based upon the record evidence, the district court in this matter has done just that–accurately discerned the contemporaneous intent and understanding of the 1882 Act. The court carefully reviewed the relevant legislative history, contemporary historical context, subsequent congressional and administrative references to the reservation, and demographic trends, and did so in such a fashion that any additional analysis would only be unnecessary surplus. Ever mindful to “resolve any ambiguities in favor of the Indians,” there is nothing in this case to overcome the “presumption in favor of the continued existence” of the Omaha Indian Reservation. Yankton Sioux Tribe, 522 U.S. at 344 (quotation omitted); Yankton Sioux Tribe v. Podhradsky, 606 F.3d 985, 991 (8th Cir. 2010) (quotation omitted).

Briefs here.

Lower court materials here.

Eighth Circuit Briefs in Smith v. Parker — Formerly a Tribal Court Jurisdiction Matter, Now a Reservation Boundaries Matter

July 9, 2014December 19, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here:

Nebraska Opening Brief

Tribe Brief

US Brief

Nebraska Reply Brief

Lower court materials and links to prior iterations of this case here.

Opening Eighth Circuit Brief in Smith v. Parker — Formerly a Tribal Court Jurisdiction Matter, Now a Reservation Boundaries Matter

May 22, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Nebraska Opening Brief

Lower court materials and links to prior iterations of this case here.

Federal Court Holds Omaha Reservation Not Diminished in Tribal Liquor Jurisdiction Matter

February 17, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher4 Comments

Here are the new materials in Smith v. Parker (D. Neb.):

134 Nebraska Response

135 US Response

136 Village of Pender Response

138 Omaha Tribe Response

140 Opinion

Cross-motions for summary judgment and briefs are here. Prior posts here, here, and here.

Update in Omaha Tribal Liquor Jurisdiction Case

August 2, 2013August 2, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

The parties have filed cross-motions for summary judgment:

Village of Pender Brief

Omaha Tribe Brief

The United States and the State of Nebraska have each filed briefs on the question of whether the Omaha Tribe’s 1854 reservation has been diminished/disestablished, with the federal government supporting the tribe and the state opposing:

Federal Brief

Nebraska Brief

Prior posts here, here, and here.