Here are the materials in Encana Oil & Gas v. St. Clair (D. Wyo.):
71 Order Granting Motions to Dismiss
The briefs and other materials are posted here.
Here are the materials in Encana Oil & Gas v. St. Clair (D. Wyo.):
71 Order Granting Motions to Dismiss
The briefs and other materials are posted here.
This Amended Complaint (from March 30th) is related to the previous post here. An excerpt from the complaint’s Preliminary Statement reads:
This action seeks to protect the traditional religious rights and freedoms of the Tribe and its members. Those rights include the limited taking of an eagle for traditional religious purposes of the Tribe. For two and a half years, Defendants failed or refused to issue a federal permit to allow the taking of an eagle by members of the Northern Arapaho Tribe for traditional Native American religious purposes. The denial placed members of the Tribe at risk of criminal prosecution for the taking of an eagle pursuant to their rights under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (“RFRA”), other federal laws, and the laws of the Tribe.
Northern Arapaho Code Title 13 Freedom of Religion can be found here.
As of last week, the Wyoming Game and Fish Department was reviewing whether or not the Northern Arapaho Tribe would require state permission under the permit. That article is here.
A first for a tribe. AP story here.
This appears to be an effort to avoid a tribal court trial in the wrongful death action brought by an oil worker at the Wind River Reservation (news coverage here).
Update: Last week’s hearing transcript here: encana-v-st-clair-transcript-of-march-2-pi-hearing REV (H/T)
Exhibit A – Tribal Court Orders
Exhibit B — Tribal Appellate Court Order
Exhibit C — tribal court complaint
Exhibit E — Encana Jurisdictional Submissions
Exhibit F — DHS Jurisdictional Submissions
Exhibit M — Northern Arapaho Motion to Intervene
Exhibit N — Eastern Shoshone Motion to Intervene
Exhibit P — Order Allowing Intervention
Exhibit Q1 — Compilation of Tribal Court Pleadings
DCT Order Granting Estate Motion to Intervene
Defendant Opposition to Motion for PI
Here is that brief in Shoshone Tribe v. United States: Wind River Tribes Opening Brief
From the government website:
On November 29, 1864, soldiers from the US military attacked a peaceful encampment of Cheyenne and Arapaho along Sand Creek. Over 150 Indians were killed in the attack, most of whom were women, children, or elderly. The location of the Sand Creek Massacre site was obscured through time even to descendents of massacre survivors. The Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site Study Act of 1998 directed the National Park Service to identify the location the massacre area and evaluate the suitability designating the site as a national park unit.
Family stories from Cheyenne and Arapaho about the massacre were used to help identify the location of the massacre site. Tribes had the opportunity to conduct their own “oral histories.” The tribal investigations were conducted by descendents of massacre survivors and tribal leaders. Historians also searched archives for the story of Sand Creek in maps, diaries, testimonies from soldiers and Indians, newspaper articles, homestead records, military scouting reports, and historic photos.
From the NYTs:
RIVERTON, Wyo. — At 69, her eyes soft and creased with age, Alvena Oldman remembers how the teachers at St. Stephens boarding school on the Wind River Reservation would strike students with rulers if they dared to talk in their native Arapaho language.
“We were afraid to speak it,” she said. “We knew we would be punished.”
More than a half-century later, only about 200 Arapaho speakers are still alive, and tribal leaders at Wind River, Wyoming’s only Indian reservation, fear their language will not survive. As part of an intensifying effort to save that language, this tribe of 8,791, known as the Northern Arapaho, recently opened a new school where students will be taught in Arapaho. Elders and educators say they hope it will create a new generation of native speakers.
Oral argument in this very interesting case is set for December 17, 2007 in Denver. The panel consists of Ebel, Kelly, and McConnell.
Our previous post with initial briefs and the lower court opinion is here. Friday retained counsel and that attorney was given leave by the Court to file a supplemental brief (see below the fold).