Office of Special Trustee

Federal Court Dismisses Challenge to Indian Preference in Employment at Office of Special Trustee

October 6, 2013October 4, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here are the materials in Hester v. Salazar (D. Utah):

An excerpt from the R&R:

Because the Supreme Court has ruled in Mancari that Indian preference “does not constitute ‘racial discrimination,’ “ Mancari, 471 U.S. at 553, Mr. Hester’s claims that he was subjected to racial discrimination and that his civil rights have been violated are not valid. Therefore, because Mr. Hester has not stated a claim upon which relief can be granted, and it would be futile to amend his complaint, his complaint should be dismissed under the authority of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Based on that conclusion, Mr. Hester’s motion to appoint counsel and motion for service of process should be deemed moot.

Post-Judgment Motion in Indian Preference Case — Indian Educators Federation v. Kempthorne

December 5, 2008Matthew L.M. Fletcher

This case, decided in April and reported here (see opinion and materials), is in the D.C. district court. Now the question is whether the plaintiffs, who prevailed in April, are entitled to a preliminary injunction demanding the Secretary comply with the order the way the plaintiffs want, or whether the Secretary can comply in his or her own manner. The court denied the union’s motion.

ief-motion-for-preliminary-injunction

doi-motion-for-entry-of-final-judgment

doi-response-to-motion-for-pi

ief-reply-brief

ief-v-kemppthorne-post-judgment-dct-order