Here.
Deadline is April 20, 2012.
Nooksack Tribal Attorney Position Announcement
Here.
Deadline is April 20, 2012.
Nooksack Indian Tribe
North County Community Alliance, Inc. v. Salazar Petition Stage Filing Complete
Here is the petition (previously posted).
Here is the cert opposition from the Solicitor General.
And here is the reply: North County Community Alliance Reply to Cert Opposition
This petition is slated for the April 16, 2010 Conference.
Cert Petition Filed over Nooksack Casino
Here is the petition in North Country Community Alliance v. Salazar: North County Community Alliance Cert Petition
Lower court materials are here.
The questions presented:
Must the National Indian Gaming Commission establish its jurisdiction over a tribe’s potential gaming sites, by determining that such sites qualify as “Indian lands”, before approving the tribe’s gaming ordinance?
Does the National Indian Gaming Commission act ultra vires when it approves a tribal gaming ordinance which allows construction and operation of a gaming facility on land which is never determined by the Commission to be “Indian lands”?
There doesn’t appear to be any reason to grant cert in this case. By the petitioner’s own admission, there is no circuit split. This is a case of first impression before the Court, and that usually means a death knell for the petition.
Ninth Circuit Rejects Challenge to Nooksack Casino
Here is the opinion, with dissent, in North County Community Alliance v. Salazar.
Briefs:
North County Community Allliance Brief
An excerpt from the majority:
We hold that the Alliance’s challenge to the NIGC’s 1993
approval of the Ordinance, insofar as it relates to the licensing
and construction of the Casino, is not time-barred. We hold on
the merits that the NIGC did not have a duty under IGRA to
make an Indian lands determination in 1993 before approving
the Nooksacks’ non-site-specific proposed gaming Ordinance.
We also hold that the NIGC did not have a duty under IGRA
to make an Indian lands determination in 2006 when the
Nooksacks licensed and began construction of the Casino pursuant
to the approved Ordinance. Finally, we hold that there
was no violation of NEPA.
We hold that the Alliance’s challenge to the NIGC’s 1993 approval of the Ordinance, insofar as it relates to the licensing and construction of the Casino, is not time-barred. We hold on the merits that the NIGC did not have a duty under IGRA to make an Indian lands determination in 1993 before approving the Nooksacks’ non-site-specific proposed gaming Ordinance. We also hold that the NIGC did not have a duty under IGRA to make an Indian lands determination in 2006 when the Nooksacks licensed and began construction of the Casino pursuant to the approved Ordinance. Finally, we hold that there was no violation of NEPA.
And from the dissent:
Turtle Talk 