Here is the order (CA10 Order Granting En Banc Review), the earlier materials (here), the news report from Indianz, and here are the en banc petition stage materials:
EPA Opposition to En Banc Petition
Navajo Nation
NYTs Tourism Article about Navajo
From the NYTs:
ON the road through the tree-studded high desert toward the small town of Chinle, Ariz., the car radio was bringing in the local Navajo station, with a playlist heavy in Top 40 hits, peppered with Navajo-language station breaks and car commercials. The sky was a cloudless blue, and I was on my way, with my childhood friend Esther Chak, to Canyon de Chelly, a geologic maze of towering red cliffs and deep-cut gorges dotted with pictographs and ruins of ancient cliffside villages. Lying in the heart of the 21st-century Navajo Nation, it is one of the oldest continuously inhabited places in North America, a window into both an ancient world and a modern one.
It was late afternoon when we reached the mouth of the canyon. As we stood at the visitors’ entrance, dazzled by the 360-degree horizon beckoning us from every direction, Merlin Yazzie, a cherub-faced park ranger with a ponytail, gave us a friendly wave.
“Is this your first visit to the area?” he said. “Welcome to Navajoland.”
Cash for Clunkers Doesn’t Do Much for Navajos
Article from the Navajo Times here via Pechanga.
Three reasons, it appears. One, the program isn’t designed for true “clunkers,” that is, the Buick up on blocks in the front yard:
“I have a lot of people come and tell me, ‘I’ve got a clunker sitting in the front yard,'” Becker said. “Well, no, the program doesn’t work that way. It’s designed to get clunkers off the road, not out of people’s yards.”
And two — Navajos like big vehicles:
Another problem is that the program requires buyers to trade for a vehicle that gets between two and four miles per gallon better gas mileage than their current vehicle, which generally means going for something smaller. It’s a concession most Navajos aren’t willing to make, said Marty Menapace, sales manager at Rico Auto Complex, because they use their vehicles to haul water, hay and other heavy cargo.
And three, bad rez roads means that there aren’t many clunkers that last long:
“”The folks that are really making out under Cash for Clunkers are folks who have vehicles from the 1980s,” Becker explained. “If you look around the reservation, there aren’t too many cars that age, for the simple reason that driving on the reservation eats up cars pretty fast.” For instance, one of Becker’s recent customers traded in a 2002 Dodge Ram. It had 250,000 miles on it.
Tenth Circuit Holds Indian Felons Lose Treaty Right to Carry Firearms
Here is the opinion in United States v. Fox. Fox is Navajo.
An excerpt:
Dionysius Fox, a member of the Navajo Nation, was arrested on the Navajo Reservation on an unrelated charge and found in possession of a shotgun and a rifle. Mr. Fox is a convicted felon, subject to the provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), which prohibits the possession of firearms by those previously adjudged guilty of felonies. Although he acknowledges that he is prohibited from possessing firearms beyond Navajo Reservation land, Mr. Fox asserts that he is entitled to possess guns for the limited purpose of hunting on the Navajo Reservation, pursuant to an 1868 Treaty between the United States and the Navajo Nation. We conclude, however, that Mr. Fox has relinquished any treaty right to use firearms for hunting purposes, and therefore affirm the judgment of the district court.
This case is interesting in part because another Tenth Circuit judge (see concurring opinion in U.S. v. McCane) raised a question about whether the Supreme Court’s recent Second Amendment decision D.C. v. Heller actually may make the federal statute in question in Fox unconstitutional.
Here are the briefs:
Navajo Council to Repeal Dine Fundamental Law?!?!
From the Navajo-Hopi Observer:
WINDOW ROCK, Ariz. – Last Thursday, the 21st Navajo Nation Council tabled a measure that would have repealed the Diné Fundamental Laws – a codified set of laws based on centuries-old Navajo traditional values and customs. The measure was tabled until the fall session with a vote of 48-21.
Council Delegate Raymond Joe (Tachee/Blue Gap/Whippoorwill) introduced the measure during the final day of the council’s summer session. He and others cited that these laws, which are primarily meant to govern the upbringing of Navajo youth and promote balance and harmony among Navajo people, are being abused and misinterpreted by Navajo lawmakers in order to promote their own political agendas.
The laws, codified in 2002, provide no guidance on how they should be used or applied.
NYTs Article on Uranium Contamination at Navajo
Here’s a link to the article. An excerpt:
The legacy wrought from decades of uranium mining is long and painful here on the expansive reservation. Over the years, Navajo miners extracted some four million tons of uranium ore from the ground, much of it used by the United States government to make weapons.
Many miners died from radiation-related illnesses; some, unaware of harmful health effects, hauled contaminated rocks and tailings from local mines and mills to build homes for their families.
Now, those homes are being demolished and rebuilt under a new government program that seeks to identify what are very likely dozens of uranium-contaminated structures still standing on Navajo land and to temporarily relocate people living in them until the homes can be torn down and rebuilt.
Stephen B. Etsitty, executive director of the Navajo Nation Environmental Protection Agency, and other tribal officials have been grappling for years with the environmental fallout from uranium mining.
New Mexico Supreme Court Grants Cert in ICWA Case
The New Mexico Supreme Court will hear State v. Marlene C. (link to court’s certiorari page). Here is the lower court opinion.
From the N.M. Court of Appeals opinion:
Mother appeals from an adjudication of neglect. Mother is a member of the Navajo Nation, and the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 (ICWA), 25 U.S.C. §§ 1901-1963 (2006), applies to Child. Although the parties to this case agree that ICWA does apply, they disagree about its specific application to issues of preservation and evidentiary requirements. We hold that under the circumstances of this case, ICWA permits Mother to challenge on appeal the sufficiency of the evidence presented at the adjudicatory hearing, and we further hold that the Children, Youth, and Families Department (Department) did not provide sufficient evidence to satisfy the requirements of ICWA. Accordingly, we reverse the adjudication of neglect and remand for further proceedings.
NYTs: Navajo Nation to Vote on Structure of Government
From the NYTs (Navajo Supreme Court opinion):
FLAGSTAFF, Ariz. (AP) — Navajo voters have never had much of a say in how their modern government was shaped. But that may soon change, after a tribal judge cleared the way for a special election on a restructuring that could alter the balance of power on the sprawling reservation.
The government structure was forced upon Navajo voters 86 years ago and was reorganized under three branches without their consent.
Maybe Navajos “will have a greater sense of ownership in the government than they now have,” said Dale Mason, who teaches Navajo government at the University of New Mexico, Gallup.
In 1923, the federal government created the Tribal Council to sign off on oil and gas leases. Before that, Navajos largely governed themselves. Small bands were led by headmen, or naataanii, who came together only in times of crisis to solve problems that extended beyond their communities.
Even if such a meeting, called a naachid, resulted in a decision to act, no Navajo was bound to comply.
With the discovery of oil on the reservation in 1922, the federal government needed an entity to deal with for leasing matters. It appointed three Navajos to a business council, but soon realized that the group needed to be more representative and expanded it to include delegates from across the reservation.
Cert Denied in Arizona Snowbowl Case
The Supreme Court denied cert in the Arizona Snowbowl case today, link via SCOTUSblog. Our materials on the case are posted here.
Navajo Nation’s Amicus Brief in Voting Rights Act Case
From the ASU Indian Law blog:
The Indian Legal Clinic and Sacks Tierney filed an amici brief in the above-reference case regarding the constitutionality of the Section 5 preclearance requirements. Indian Legal Clinic Student Attorney Nikki Borchardt (3L), Adjunct Professor and ASU Alum Judy Dworkin and Professor Patty Ferguson Bohnee prepared the brief.
Brief of the Navajo Nation, Anthony Wounded Head, et al. Amici are concerned that if the Court declares that the reauthorization of Section 5 is unconstitutional, American Indian voting rights will be significantly impacted and result in a reversal of the strides made in recent years to ensure greater Indian voter participation. This would negatively impact many American Indian voters who only recently secured the right to vote, continue to face discrimination in voting, and who cannot shoulder the financial burden to bring lawsuits under Section 2 of the VRA.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.