Here is the opinion in Moyant v. Petit:
Tribal briefs from the trial court:
Passamaquoddy Tribe
Maine Supreme Judicial Court Affirms Denial of Intervention in Child Welfare Case
Here.
The State removed non-member children from their tribal member mother, and opposed the Passamaquoddy Tribe’s request for intervention. While intervention is one of right under ICWA, because these children are non-member children, the Court found that ICWA did not apply. In addition, the Court denied the Tribe’s request for permissive intervention in a cursory paragraph. The Court based much of its interpretation and decision on the Maine Indian Claims Settlement Act, making it fairly specific to tribes in Maine. Regardless, the reasoning is frustrating, especially for a permissive intervention, which is apparently allowed “when a ‘[nonparty’s] claim or defense and the main action have a question of law or fact in common’ and intervention will not ‘unduly delay or
prejudice the adjudication of the rights of the original parties.’” M.R. Civ. P. 24(b).
The dissent, pointing out that “In the matter before us, for the safety of the children, the District Court (Calais, D. Mitchell, J.) rejected the request to place the children in a kinship placement with their maternal grandmother. Instead, it authorized the Department of Health and Human Services to seek a foster placement for the children off the reservation and with caregivers who are not related to the children and are not members of the Passamaquoddy Tribe”, therefore “[w]ith the prospect of the children being removed from their Passamaquoddy relatives and the reservation community, the Passamaquoddy Tribe sought to intervene as a matter of right or, alternatively, with the court’s permission.” The dissent also acknowledges the Tribe’s assertion that”their participation in decisions related to the placement and resources available to the children are matters of importance to the court in addressing the needs of the children, whose mother is a member of the Passamaquoddy Tribe. The Tribe’s role, distinct from the role of family members, is important in informing the court of options regarding tribal resources and connections to tribal culture.”
(You had to know I’d end a series of ICWA posts on the case I found the most frustrating.)
Prologue of Major News Profile of Passamaquoddy Tribe’s River Fight
Here is “A 13,000-year journey leads to a breaking point.”
An earlier profile is here.
Article on Maine Fisheries and the Passamaquoddy
Here.
For centuries, the Passamaquoddy people of Maine have faced a violation of their inherent rights as Indigenous Peoples. They have been repeatedly displaced from their original lands by European settlers since the 16th century, eventually limited to their current reservation in eastern Washington County, Maine. Now their fishing rights —an intrinsic part of Passamaquoddy culture and sustenance —are threatened, under the ironic pretext of equal protection for state fishermen. At issue are two pieces of legislation, both in conflict with the Maine Indian Claims Settlement Act and the Maine Implementing Act. The Passamaquoddy refused to comply with LD-451, a law that limited the tribe to issuing just 200 elver licenses in 2013, and this year’s LD-1625, which requires state fishery officials to approve each individual tribal elver license in writing. The tribe has been in discussion with the state since January on ways the Passamaquoddy can maintain its cultural identity throughout the fishing season “because our fishery is based on culture, conservation, and preservation of the eel,” says Passamaquoddy Tribal Councilman Newell Lewey.
ICT on Keith Harper and Cobell & Other Trust Settlements
Here.
An excerpt:
According to press reports, Harper, who was registered as a lobbyist for tribes in 2008, did have influence at the U.S. Department of the Interior on Indian issues while serving as a “team lead,” and under transition team guidelines, he was allowed to offer input on his personal work, which focused largely on Indian and tribal trust issues since the 1990s. This has led to the question of whether Harper recommended the hiring of the very administration officials with whom he and his firm later negotiated trust settlements. Another vexing question is whether there was a deal struck between Harper and administration officials that enhanced his firm’s financial gain from the Cobell settlement, or from other trust cases that he and his firm handled for tribes.
Keith Harper, a partner with Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton
A tribal trust case Harper and his firm worked on for the Passamaquoddy Tribe resulted in a settlement with the Obama administration of $12 million this April. In that agreement, the federal government stipulated that the lawyers were to be paid 15 percent of the settlement, $1.8 million. The agreement also said that fees for Harper’s firm were to be paid directly from the federal government. Dozens of other tribal trust settlements announced at the same time were not structured in this manner; instead, tribal officials received the full settlement, and the tribes then decided how to pay their lawyers—and in all known cases at rates lower than what Harper’s firm received for its work for the Passamaquoddy Tribe. There were 41 tribal trust settlements announced at the time.
Read more:http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2012/09/10/white-house-says-cobell-lawyer-recused-himself-on-conflicts-but-facts-contradict-133505 http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2012/09/10/white-house-says-cobell-lawyer-recused-himself-on-conflicts-but-facts-contradict-133505#ixzz265qvrQpn
Francis v. Dana-Cummings V in the Maine Supreme Court
At least I think it’s V. Regardless the Maine Supreme Court has returned again to the meaning of “internal tribal matters” in this case, which is a housing eviction case on the Passamaquoddy reservation. Here, the court holds that Maine state law is inapplicable to the challenge made by Francis to the eviction.
Here is the opinion.
US v. Newell — DCT Refuses to Dismiss Indictment Against Former Passamaquoddy Governor
I guess the heading says it all — Robert Newell was indicted for misappropriating federal money while governor of the tribe. His arguments on the motion to dismiss were based in federal Indian law; i.e., sovereign immunity, federal government failure to comply with PL 638. etc.
Nulankeyutmonen Nkihtaqmikon v. Impson Remanded to BIA
On remand in Nulankeyutmonen Nkihtaqmikon v. Impson, the district court held that the case should be remanded to the Bureau of Indian Affairs for administrative review. This case concerns a challenge to a BIA lease granted on/near Indian lands in Maine for a liquified natural gas plant.
opposition-to-renewed-motion-to-dismiss
Earlier opinions:
Turtle Talk 