Ninth Circuit

Ninth Circuit Briefs in Havasupai Tribe v. Provencio

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here:

Grand Canyon Trust Opening Brief

Havasupai Opening Brief

Federal Answer Brief

Energy Fuels Resources Answer Brief

Havasupai Reply

Ninth Circuit Briefs in Hopi Tribe v. EPA

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here:

Federal Brief

Gila River Indian Community Brief

Hopi Tribe Brief

National Parks Conservation Assn Brief

Navajo Nation Brief

Salt River Project Brief

Tribal Conservation Organizations Brief

Tribal Conservation Organizations Reply Brief

Yazzie Brief

Yazzie Reply

Petition here.

Ninth Circuit Briefs in San Luis & Delta Mendota Water Authority v. Jewell

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Federal Opening Brief

Hoopa Opening Brief

Yurok Opening Brief

San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority Opening Brief

San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority Response Brief

California Amicus Brief

Federal Response Brief

Hoopa Response Brief

Fishermen’s Brief

Yurok Response Brief

San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority Reply

Lower courts materials here.

Ninth Circuit Denies En Banc Review in Pauma Compact Dispute, Issues Amended Order

Matthew L.M. Fletcher3 Comments

Here is the amended order in Pauma Band of Luiseño Indians v. State of California.

En banc petitions here:

Cal En Banc Petition

Pauma En Banc Petition

Ninth Circuit Briefs and Materials in Jamul Action Committee v. Chaudhuri

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the briefs:

JAC Opening Brief

Federal Answer Brief

Tribal Answer Brief

JAC Reply

Oral argument video here.

Lower court materials here.

Ninth Circuit Oral Argument in Tohono O’Odham Nation v. Arizona

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here.

Briefs here.

Lower court materials here.

Supreme Court Extends Preliminary Injunction in Akina v. Hawaii

Sarah M Donnelly

Documents and orders filed in the District court posted here.

Petitioner’s emergency application here.

Link to SCOTUS docket proceedings here.

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court voted 5-4 to approve Justice Kennedy’s preliminary injunction issued last Friday.  We will post further filings when they are made available.

United States v. Bryant Cert Stage Briefs

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here:

Cert Petition

NCAI Amicus Brief in Support

Opposition Brief

US Cert Stage Reply

Lower court materials here (en banc), and here (panel).

Zepeda v. United States Cert Petition

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here:

Zepeda Cert Petition

Questions presented:

The Indian Major Crimes Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1153, makes it a federal crime for an “Indian” to commit any one of thirteen enumerated acts in “Indian country.” In this case, the en banc Ninth Circuit held that an element of the offense in prosecutions under this statute is proof that the defendant has “Indian blood,” whether or not that blood tie is to a federally recognized tribe. The question presented is:
Whether, as construed by the Ninth Circuit, Section 1153 impermissibly discriminates on the basis of race.
Opinion here. En banc materials here, here, and here. Panel materials and other materials here, here, and here.

Supreme Court Petition Involving NAGPRA, Rule 19, and Tribal Immunity

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the petition in White v. Regents of the University of California:

White Cert Petition

Questions presented:

The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), which governs repatriation of human remains to Native American tribes, contains an enforcement provision that states, “The United States district courts shall have jurisdiction over any action brought by any person alleging a violation of this chapter and shall have the authority to issue such orders as may be necessary to enforce the provisions of this chapter.” 25 U.S.C. § 3013. Over a strong dissent, a divided Ninth Circuit panel held that a party can prevent judicial review of controversial repatriation decisions by claiming a tribe is a “required party” under Rule 19 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, if the tribe invokes tribal immunity. The questions presented are:
1. Whether Rule 19 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure mandates that a district court dismiss any case in which a Native American tribe with immunity is deemed to be a “required party.”
2. Whether tribal immunity extends to cases where Rule 19 is the only basis for adding a tribe, no relief against the tribe is sought, and no other forum can issue a binding order on the dispute; and if so, whether Congress abrogated tribal immunity as a defense to claims arising under NAGPRA.
Lower court materials here.
UPDATE (1/4/16): Anthropologists Amicus Brief