Stephen Pevar to Speak at ILPC Event Tomorrow

Stephen Pevar, the author of The Rights of Indians and Tribes, is speaking tomorrow at 2pm. We also have two commentators, Philip (Sam) Deloria and Mario Gonzalez, who will talk about his book and their work. The event will be in the Castle Board Room on the third floor of the Law College (648 N. Shaw Lane, East Lansing). Coffee and snacks will be served.

March 20, 2012 2:00 pm (Castle Board Room)

Author:

Stephen Pevar

The Rights of Indians and Tribes

Commentators:

Mario Gonzalez, Gonzalez Law Firm
Philip S. (Sam) Deloria, American Indian Graduate Center

Cert Petition in Oglala Sioux Tribe v. U.S. Army Corps

Here: Oglala Sioux Tribe v. US Army Corps Cert Petition

Lower court materials here and here.

Questions presented:

1. Does the 5-year statute of limitations of Section 12 of the Indian Claims Commission Act of 1946 (“ICCA”), 60 Stat. 1049, 1052 (formerly codified at 25 U.S.C. § 70k (repealed)), which applies only to claims accruing no later than August 13, 1946, bar federal court jurisdiction over an Indian tribe’s claim that the Government breached its trust responsibility to consult with the tribe before taking significant actions adversely affecting the preservation and protection of the numerous items and sites of the tribe’s cultural and historic heritage located on federal lands within the tribe’s aboriginal territory, specifically before making the transfers of federal lands authorized by the Water Resources Development Act of August 17, 1999, Pub. L. 106-53, Title VI, §§ 601-609, 113 Stat. 269 (“WRDA”), where the tribe’s breach-of-duty-to-consult claim does not involve either an historical land claim for money damages or the revision of treaties, contracts or agreements between the tribe and the United States, and where the breach occurred no earlier than 2002 when the WRDA transfers began?

2. Does an Indian tribe have standing to pursue its claim that the Government breached its trust responsibility to consult with the tribe before taking significant actions adversely affecting the preservation and protection of the numerous items and sites of the tribe’s cultural and historic heritage located on lands within the tribe’s aboriginal territory, where the merit of the tribe’s non-frivolous contention, that it has a legally protected interest in the tribe’s aboriginal territory based on the Government’s trust relationship with the Indian tribes, must be assumed in assessing the tribe’s standing to sue? Continue reading