Federal Court Affirms Oklahoma School’s Refusal to Allow Native High School Graduate to Wear Eagle Feather on Graduation Cap

Here is the order in Griffith v. Caney Valley Public Schools (N.D. Okla.):

22. Order and Opinion (5-20-15)

Prior materials here.

Magistrate Decision in Griffith v. Caney Valley Public Schools

In which the student is denied the right to wear an eagle feather on her graduation cap. Her graduation from Caney Valley Public Schools, which is just north of Tulsa, is tomorrow.

Recommendation

The School demonstrated that the graduation ceremony is a formal ceremony and that the unity of the graduating class as a whole is fostered by the uniformity of the caps which are the most prominently visible part of the graduation regalia viewed by the audience to the graduation. Prohibiting decoration of any graduation cap by any student for any purpose serves these legitimate interests. Based on the application of these established principles the undersigned finds that Plaintiff has not demonstrated a substantial likelihood of success on her First Amendment Free Exercise of Religion claim.

Plaintiff’s Motion and Brief

Defendant’s Motion and Brief

20. Objection to Report and Rec (5-20-15)

21. Defs Resp to Obj to RR (5-20-15)

Oklahoma v. Hobia Cert Petition

Here:

Petition for a Writ of Certiorari (as filed)

Question presented:

Does Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community, 134 S.Ct. 2024 (2014), require the dismissal of a State’s suit to prevent tribal officers from conducting gaming that would be unlawful under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act and a state-tribal compact when

• the suit for declaratory and injunctive relief has been brought against tribal officials – not the tribe;
• the gaming will occur in Indian country, on the land of another tribe; and

• the state-tribal compact’s arbitration provision does not require arbitration before filing suit?

Lower court materials here.

Tenth Circuit Issues Amended Opinion in Oklahoma v. Hobia

Here. Like its earlier decision, today’s amended opinion concludes that the district court erroneously granted the State’s request for a preliminary injunction and held that the State’s complaint, which alleged class III gaming activities on non-Indian lands, failed to state a claim under IGRA.

The Tenth Circuit also reiterated that arbitration provisions in the state’s gaming compact effectively barred Oklahoma from suing tribal officials in federal court for purported violations of the compact. The court remanded the matter to the Northern District of Oklahoma with instructions to vacate the preliminary injunction and to dismiss Oklahoma’s complaint with prejudice.

Also, the court denied the petition for en banc review.

Panel materials are here.

Federal Govt. Sues Osage Wind over Wind Energy Turbine Excavations

Here is the complaint in United States v. Osage Wind LLC (N.D. Okla.):

2 Complaint

An excerpt:

In this civil action, the United States seeks a preliminary and a permanent injunction and a declaratory judgment that the ongoing excavation activities of Osage Wind, LLC, Enel Kansas, LLC, and Enel Green Power North America, Inc. (collectively “Defendants”) in Osage County, Oklahoma, are unlawful and must be suspended until Defendants have obtained all requisite federal regulatory approvals and have entered into appropriate leases approved by the Secretary of the Interior (“the Secretary”).

Briefs in NEPA Challenge to Interior Drilling Approvals re: Osage Mineral Estate

Here are selected materials so far in Donelson v. United States (N.D. Okla.):

46 First Amended Complaint

124 B&G Motion to Dismiss

136 Devon Motion to Dismiss

148 US Motion to Dismiss

162 Donelson Response to B&G Motion to Dismiss

163 Donelson Response to Devon Motion to Dismiss

166 Donelson Response to US Motion to Dismiss

170 B&G Reply

174 US Reply

175 Devon Reply

Update (2/28/17):

229 DCT Order Dismissing Claims

Tenth Circuit Reverses Oklahoma v. Hobia Relying on Bay Mills

Here is the opinion:

CA10 Opinion

Lower court supplemental briefs here.

Briefs are here.

Lower court materials here.

Nonrecognized Cherokee Nation West Sues U.S. Army Corps over Religious Freedom

Here is the complaint in Cherokee Nation West v. United States Army Corps of Engineers (N.D. Okla.):

1 Complaint

An excerpt:

Plaintiff seeks equal access to Fort Gibson Lake to hold a religious ceremony on November 7, 2014, March 2015 and on future dates. Although Fort Gibson Lake is open to the general public for indiscriminate use, the Defendants denied Plaintiff equal access to the public area of Fort Gibson Lake because Plaintiff wanted to hold a religious ceremony, and such ceremony was considered “sacrilegious” by the government Defendants.

Wrongful Death Action against Pawnee Law Enforcement Allowed to Proceed

Here are the materials in Estate of Gonzales ex rel. Gonzales v. Brown (N.D. Okla.):

32 Waters Motion to Dismiss

38 Opposition to Waters

40 Waters Reply

45 Miller Motion to Dismiss

54 Kanuho Motion to Dismiss

55 Leading Fox Motion to Dismiss

60 Opposition to Miller

64 Miller Reply

74 Opposition to Leading Fox

75 Opposition to Kanuho

76 Opposition to Kanuho

77 Leading Fox Reply

78 Kanuho Reply 1

79 Kanuho Reply 2

81 DCT Order

Tenth Circuit Finds Federal Question in Thlopthlocco Tribal Town v. Stidham, Orders Tribal Court Exhaustion

Here is the opinion in Thlopthlocco Tribal Town v. Stidham. An excerpt:

The Thlopthlocco Tribal Town is a federally recognized Indian tribe in Oklahoma. An election dispute arose about which individuals were properly elected or appointed to govern the Thlopthlocco people. Seeking to resolve that dispute, the Tribal Town filed suit in the tribal court of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation and, accordingly, voluntarily submitted to that court’s jurisdiction.

The Tribal Town subsequently concluded it did not want to maintain its suit in tribal court and dismissed its claims. But the defendant in that suit had, by that time, filed cross-claims. Arguing that the Tribal Town’s sovereign immunity waiver did not cover proceedings on the cross-claims, the Tribal Town attempted to escape Muscogee court jurisdiction, but, in various decisions, several judges and justices of the Muscogee courts held that they may exercise jurisdiction over the Tribal Town without its consent.

The Tribal Town then filed a federal action in the Northern District of Oklahoma against those Muscogee judicial officers, seeking to enjoin the Muscogee courts’ exercise of jurisdiction. The district court dismissed the case, finding that the federal courts lacked subject matter jurisdiction, the defendants were entitled to sovereign immunity, the Tribal Town had failed to join indispensable parties, and the Tribal Town had failed to exhaust its remedies in tribal court. We conclude, however, that the Tribal Town has presented a federal question and that the other claims do not require dismissal. But we agree the Tribal Town should exhaust its remedies in tribal court while its federal court action is abated.

Here are the briefs:

Thlopthlocco Opening Brief

Stidham Brief

Thlopthlocco Reply Brief

Lower court materials here.