Here are the briefs in Maverick Gaming LLC v. United States:

Lower court materials here and here.
Here is the opinion in Swinomish Indian Community v. Lummi Nation.
Briefs here. Lower court materials here.

Briefs here.
Here is the unpublished opinion in Villasenor v. Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians.
The tribe’s brief:

Here is the unpublished opinion in Western Watersheds Project v. McCullough. And same for the Bartell Ranch/Burns Paiute case.
Selected briefs:
Lower court materials here.
Here are the materials in In re Klamath Irrigation District:
Here are the briefs in United States v. Gordon:
Ok, so there’s only that brief so far. Also, since the defendant stipulated to tribal membership with Nez Perce, I doubt this has legs, but it’s the kind of full-throated attack on the Indian status cases arising under the Indian country criminal jurisdiction statutes that we should expect more regularly — i.e., the kind that relies a LOT on single-authored concurrences and dissents from a certain SCT Justice that tends to rely on discredited historical research.
Here’s the lower court judgment (nothing terribly helpful here since the defendant stipulated to tribal membership):

Here:
Question presented:
Whether Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19 requires dismissal of an action challenging a federal agency’s use of water subject to state-adjudicated water rights if a Native American tribe asserts an interest in the suit and does not consent to joinder.
Lower court materials here.

Here is the opinion in Upper Skagit Indian Tribe v. Sauk-Suiatte Indian Tribe.
Briefs and so on here.

You must be logged in to post a comment.