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

NYTs: “Native American Tribes Move to Make Real Estate a Force for Renewal”

Here.

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.

News Profile of Nottawaseppi Huron Band Reservation

Here is “Success of Pine Creek Indian Reservation is something elders would have been proud to see.”

ABA Journal Profile of Nottawaseppi Huron Potawatomi Appellate Judge Greg Smith

Here.

Sault Tribe Moves for Summary Judgment in Its Off-Rez Fee to Trust Claim

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

43 Sault Tribe MSJ

45 Detroit Casinos MSJ

48 NHBP MSJ50 SCIT MSJ

54 Interior MSJ

56 Sault Tribe Reply

60 Detroit Casinos Reply

61 SCIT Reply

62 Interior Reply

63 NHBP Reply

Case tag here.

Tribes and Detroit Casinos Allowed to Intervene in Sault Tribe Suit over Lansing and Wayne County Off-Rez Gaming Applications

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

1 Complaint

1-1 Solicitor Opinion on Bay Mills

1-2 Wayne County Application

1-3 Lansing Application

1-4 Supplemental Materials

1-5 Jan 2017 Interior Letter

1-6 July 2017 Interior Decision

11 Answer

16-1 Saginaw Chippewa Motion to Intervene

18-1 Detroit Casinos Motion to Intervene

20 Nottawaseppi Huron Band Motion to Intervene

28 Sault Tribe Opposition to Intervention Motions

29 Federal Opposition to Detroit Casinos Motion to Intervene

31 Saginaw Chippewa Reply in Support of 16

32 Detroit Casinos Reply in Support of Motion to Intervene

33 NHBPI Reply in Support of Motion to Intervene

35 DCT Order

Prior posts on the Lansing/Wayne County casino proposals are here.