On January 28, 2012, the Muscogee (Creek) National Council held its Legislative branches Quarterly Session. An account of the meeting can be found on the Tribal Town Radio Blog. At the meeting, Andrew Adams III, a citizen of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation, was confirmed as a Supreme Court Justice. Andrew’s other contributions to the legal field can be found here. He’s also a Turtle Talk contributor.
Congratulations to Andrew and his family!
Here is the opinion in Yancey v. Thomas.
Excerpt:
We are not persuaded. We agree with the Thomases that Yancey’s action is barred by res judicata and that the state-court rulings must be given full faith and credit under § 1738.
The briefs:
Lower court materials here.
Here is the opinion. And the briefs.
An excerpt:
Judge Gregory R. Stidham of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation District Court appeals the district court’s order granting preliminary injunctive relief to Crowe & Dunlevy (“Crowe”) and denying Judge Stidham’s motion to dismiss. Crowe & Dunlevy, P.C. v. Stidham, 609 F. Supp. 2d 1211, 1227 (N.D. Okla. 2009). Because the district court correctly denied Judge Stidham’s motion to dismiss and did not abuse its discretion in granting the preliminary injunction, we affirm.
Here are the materials in Fife v. Moore (E.D. Okla.):
The court concluded that the Muscogee District Court had no jurisdiction to prosecute tribal members for theft against the tribal government because the crime did not occur in Indian country (which until recently would have been considered preposterous).
This case implicates two important issues (one at Muscogee and one involving many Oklahoma tribes). The first is the continuing dispute over the tribal district court at Muscogee (see our posts here and here). The other involves Indian Country in Oklahoma, the subject of a cert petition involving the Supreme Court (most recent post here).
Here is a press release issued today by the Muscogee National Council titled, “Bureau of Indian Affairs Fails to Investigate Allegations of Tribal and Federal Funds.”
Here is the article.
An excerpt:
The judicial system of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation is in limbo.
At its Nov. 20 regular meeting, the tribe’s National Council overrode a veto by Principal Chief A.D. Ellis and approved a bill that abolished the tribe’s district court and replaced it with three courts.
Each of the new courts focuses solely on one legal area, with one for criminal cases, one for civil cases and one for family cases. The tribe’s Supreme Court was not affected by the legislation.
National Council Speaker Roger Barnett said, “We had some concerns about people getting proper assistance in specific areas, so specific courts were established for those areas.”
Ellis had vetoed the bill Nov. 10, claiming that it violated the separation of powers clause in the tribe’s constitution. The council voted 20-5 to override the veto.
So far, no judges have been seated to oversee the new courts. Barnett said the Chief’s Office has 60 days from the legislation’s passage to make nominations or the council will do it.
In response to the legislation, Ellis sued the National Council in the tribe’s district court.
Here is the opinion in Oklahoma ex rel. Edmundson v. Larkin (N.D. Okla.): DCT Order Remanding to State Court
[Links have been restored, May 28, 2010.]
Crowe & Dunlevy, P.C. v. Stidham, Appellant
Lower court order is here.
From ICT:
WASHINGTON – On the heels of a Supreme Court decision that complicates land into trust matters for tribes, a policymaker from Tulsa, Okla. is organizing a fight against the land into trust interests of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation.
City Councilor Bill Christiansen is currently drafting a resolution against efforts by the Muscogee Nation to work with the BIA to place two parcels of land into federal trust.
Christiansen, who is the president of an aviation company, said the resolution is needed because the city would lose more property and sales taxes if the BIA grants more land into trust for the tribe. He said the city has already lost much money due to the tribe’s non-taxable existence, yet the city still has to pay for public services that benefit tribal members.
He also worries that the tribe could build a mall on the lands in contention, which would compete with facilities in the city that pay property and other taxes.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.