Here are the materials in Lopez v. United States:

Here are the materials in Lopez v. United States:

Here is the lead opinion in Arizona Mining Reform Coalition v. United States Forest Service. A partial dissent is forthcoming.
Selected briefs are here.


Register here.
The Implementation Project will be hosting the next TIP Quarterly Meeting on December 16, 2025 from 12:00-1:30 PM (Mountain Time).
“UN Declaration in Action: International and Domestic Strategies to Protect the Apache Sacred Site of Oak Flat” will feature Mr. Alex Ritchie, San Carlos Apache Tribe Attorney General. Join us to explore the ongoing efforts to defend Oak Flat and the role the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoplesplays in shaping these strategies. This webinar will offer valuable insights for anyone interested in Indigenous rights, cultural preservation, or Tribal advocacy. Moderated by TIP Co-Directors: Prof. Kristen Carpenter and Ms. Sue Noe.
Here.
An excerpt:
Oak Flat sits on one of North America’s largest undeveloped deposits of copper. The mineral is used in dozens of items, including smartphones, electric vehicles and solar panels. The company Resolution Copper believes there are 20 million tons of copper under Oak Flat that could supply up to one-quarter of the U.S. copper demand over 40 years. At today’s prices, experts say that much copper would be worth about $200 billion. The company asserts it will create more than a thousand jobs in an area with high unemployment.
Mining Oak Flat, however, would eventually transform the landscape, creating what geologists say would be a vast crater. To prevent this, the tribe and other opponents of the mine have filed multiple lawsuits and tried unsuccessfully to get one of the cases heard before the U.S. Supreme Court. A federal appeals court will hold a hearing for several of the suits in early January.
“If they take Oak Flat, they destroy our religion and who we are,” said Vanessa Nosie, an archaeology aide for the San Carlos Apache Tribe who also helps her father lead a nonprofit fighting the mine. Lozen, she added, is “dancing to carry the fight for all we’re trying to save.”
As the singers drummed in the downpour, Lozen pounded her ceremonial cane into the muddy ground. Thunder rumbled in the distance, and she faltered for a moment.
A woman in the crowd whooped. Another onlooker yelled, “Go, Lozen!” She pulled her shoulders back, lifted her head and looked straight ahead to the sprawling landscape of cacti and Emory oaks that give the region its name.
She kept dancing.

Here are the briefs in several consolidated cases [Brown Lopez v. United States, 25-5197; Arizona Mining Reform Coalition v. Rollins, 25-5185; San Carlos Apache Tribe v. United States Forest Service, 25-5189]:
Arizona Reform Mining Coalition Opening Brief
San Carlos Apache Tribe Opening Brief
Religious Freedom Institute Amicus Brief

Here are the new materials in San Carlos Apache Tribe v. United States (D. Ariz.):
105 Tribe Motion for Preliminary Injunction
116 Resolution Copper Opposition

Here are new materials in San Carlos Apache Tribe v. Dept. of Agriculture (D. Ariz.):

Here is today’s order list, with the dissent beginning on page 6.
An excerpt:
While this Court enjoys the power to choose which cases it will hear, its decision to shuffle this case off our docket without a full airing is a grievous mistake—one with consequences that threaten to reverberate for generations. Just imagine if the government sought to demolish a historic cathedral on so questionable a chain of legal reasoning. I have no doubt that we would find that case worth our time. Faced with the government’s plan to destroy an ancient site of tribal worship, we owe the Apaches no less. They may live far from Washington, D. C., and their history and religious practices may be unfamiliar to many. But that should make no difference. “Popular religious views are easy enough to defend. It is in protecting unpopular religious beliefs that we prove this country’s commitment to . . . religious freedom.” Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Comm’n, 584 U. S. 617, 649 (2018) (GORSUCH, J., concurring).

Prior posts here,
You must be logged in to post a comment.