D.C. Federal Court Rejects Sault Tribe’s Third Effort to Force Interior to Acquire Land for Off-Rez Gaming

Here is the order in Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians v. Haaland (D.D.C.):

Briefs here.

Parties Renew Motions for Summary Judgment in Sault Tribe Bid for Detroit-Area Casino

Here are the new materials in Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians v. Haaland (formerly Bernhardt, Zinke, etc.) (D.D.C.):

Time to rumble.

103 Federal Reply

104 Tribes Reply

This case is on remand from the D.C. Circuit.

Michigan Public Service Commission Requests More Information re: Enbridge Line 5 Tunnel

Here:

Elizabeth LaPensée

Tribal brief here.

Sault Tribe En Banc Petition in Trust Land Acquisition Case

Here is the petition in Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians v. Haaland:

Panel stage materials here.

Saint Mary’s [i.e. Sault Sainte Marie] Canal celebration, reviewing stand and Indian village

Tribal Brief in Michigan Public Service Commission Case Involving Enbridge Line 5

Here:

Mackinac Island 2020

Split D.C. Circuit Rules against Sault Tribe in Mandatory Trust Acquisition Appeal [“shall” does not mean “shall”]

Here is the opinion in Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians v. Haaland.

Briefs here.

For commentary on legal analysis by reading the dictionary, see Joseph Kimball’s work on the Michigan Supreme Court’s use of dictionaries.

National Archives

D.C. Circuit Briefs in Sault Tribe Mandatory Trust Land Acquisition Dispute

Here are the briefs (so far) in Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians v. Bernhardt:

US Opening Brief

Nottawaseppi Huron Band Potawatomi + Saginaw Chippewa Brief

Detroit Casinos Brief

Sault Tribe Brief

Law Prof Amicus Brief

Detroit Casinos Reply

Joint Tribal Reply

US Reply

Lower court materials here.

Sault Tribe Prevails over Interior over Interpretation of Mandatory Trust Land Acquisition Statute

Here is the opinion in Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians v. Bernhardt (D.D.C.):

opinion-1.pdf

Case tag here.

26indianclcommndec538.pdf

New Fletcher Paper: “The Rise and Fall of the Ogemakaan”

Please check out my new paper, “The Rise and Fall of the Ogemakaan,” now available on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

Anishinaabe (Odawa, Bodewadmi, and Ojibwe) legal and political philosophy is buried under the infrastructure of modern self-determination law and policy. Modern Anishinaabe tribes are rough copies of American governments. The Anishinaabeg (people) usually choose their ogemaag (leaders) through an at-large election process that infects tribal politics with individualized self-interest. Those elected leaders, what I call ogemaakaan (artificial leaders) preside over modern governments that encourage hierarchy, political opportunism, and tyranny of the majority. While modern tribal governments are extraordinary successes compared to the era of total federal control, a significant number of tribes face intractable political disputes that can traced to the philosophical disconnect from culture and tradition.

Anishinaabe philosophy prioritizes ogemaag who are deferential and serve as leaders only for limited purposes and times. Ogemaag are true representatives who act only when and how instructed to do so by their constituents. Their decisions are rooted in cultural and traditional philosophies, including for example Mino-Bimaadiziwin (the act of living a good life), Inawendewin (relational accountability), Niizhwaaswii Mishomis/Nokomis Kinoomaagewinawaan (the Seven Gifts the Grandfathers or Grandmothers), and the Dodemaag (clans). I offer suggestions on how modern tribal government structures can be lightly modified to restore much of this philosophy.